Taxi Driver Online

How exactly does a applicant appeal a refusal to issue a licence (operators) ?

it has been refused, the applicant is requesting an official section 61 notice but hos do they actually appeal?

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

Magistrates Court presumably.

62 Suspension and revocation of operators' licences (1) Notwithstanding anything in this Part of this Act a district council may suspend or revoke, or (on application therefor under section 5 5 of this Act) refuse to renew an operator's licence on any of the following grounds—
(a) any offence under, or non-compliance with, the provisions of this Part of this Act;
(b) any conduct on the part of the operator which appears to the district council to render him unfit to hold an operator's licence;
(c) any material change since the licence was granted in any of the circumstances of the operator on the basis of which the licence was granted; or
(d) any other reasonable cause.
(2) Where a district council suspend, revoke or refuse to renew any licence under this section they shall give to the operator notice of the grounds on which the licence has been suspended or revoked or on which they have refused to renew such licence within fourteen days of such suspension, revocation or refusal.
(3) Any operator aggrieved by a decision of a district council under this section may appeal to a magistrates' court.

If you choose to appeal you have 21 days to get it in after that your stuffed.
The last time I did an appeal which was about 2 yrs ago it was about £200

And anyone lodging an appeal,get a receipt for the lodging dosh and acknowledgment/receipt of the actual lodging document as well, dated. I say this because of the number of courts where lodging papers have been lost, denied all knowledge by the Clerk, etc... ain’t justice grand?!

if the current PH ops licence expires this saturday night and along with it the car PH plate i guess its game over?

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

If you appeal you can request the court holds the refusal pending a formal appeal.

But the council must tell you what the grounds for refusal are before the license runs out, and tell you the course of action should you appeal.

_________________
IDFIMH

so the council say there is NO 1 year PH ops licence "unless they have worries about the licence"

applicant asks for a sect 61 refusal

council say she hasnt applied so it hasnt been refused officially

the forms have no 1 year option on them..




she cant appeal for a refusal she cant have as she cant apply....

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

The legislation is reasonably vague: it allows a local authority to issue a licence for either 3 years for a driver, or 5 years for an operator or "for such lesser period, specified in the licence, as the district council think appropriate in the circumstances of the case".
What does this mean? It clearly gives the Council a discretion. The next question is: in what circumstances should they exercise that discretion?
If an applicant wants a licence for a shorter period, it must be possible for the authority to grant one. I think it is acceptable to have a limited range of shorter licences, e.g. 1-year and 3-year driver's licences, 1-year, 3-year and 5-year operator's licences. The reasons why the applicant wants a shorter period are immaterial.
The further question concerns the fees that authorities are levying for the extended licences. Generally, licence fees cannot be used as a revenue raising tool and should only cover the costs of the licensing regime (see R (on the application of Hemming) and others v The Lord Mayor and Citizens of Westminster3 in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court). In relation to taxi licence fees levied under ss53 and 70 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, there are further restrictions on what can be recovered via the licence fees.

As a result of this it is quite apparent that a 3-year licence fee cannot simply be triple the 1-year fee, or a 5-year one five-fold the cost of an annual licence. Whilst there can be some increase over the basic annual fee, it must be carefully calculated to fall within the limitations imposed by ss53 and 70.

I should have stated that the shorter period is only allowed for individuals and not companies, companies are not allowed shorter periods.

That rings a bell, but wasn't that based on a misreading of the legislation?

Something about being allowed in 'individual circumstances', which someone construed as meaning a sole trade rather than a company

Let’s look at what it says
Section 10: Taxis and private hire vehicles: duration of licences
54.This section amends two sections of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 that deal with the granting of licences to drive taxis and private hire vehicles and licences to operate private hire vehicles.

56.Subsection (3) changes the law in such a way as to establish a standard duration of five years for a private hire vehicle operator licence. The section specifies that a licence may be granted for a period of less than five years but only in the circumstances of an individual case, not because of a blanket policy.

I remember this discussion a while back.

I took the view, and still hold it, that the word individual means a 'one off', not an individual person.

_________________
IDFIMH

Yes, and if you look carefully at the explanatory note posted by ManCityFan, it contrasts the 'circumstances of individual case' with a 'blanket policy', implying that 'individual' refers to a one-off rather than the normal course of events, so it's not about the applicant's 'legal personality', or whatever it's called.


And that's just the explanatory notes - if you look at the actual wording of the legislation, there's absolutely nothing to suggest it's about legal personality:


Also, if the intention was to distinguish between legal personalities (eg sole traders, partnerships, companies and other corporate entities) then the language used would be more precise than 'individual'