Taxi Driver Online

I have just had the following reply from my council to a letter requesting a breakdown, thier reply (in part):

1 ".... revised scale of fees" ...... "subject to an increase in line with the Retail Price Index"..........., in other words they are just increasing for the sake of it, with no regard to actual income or expenditure????

2 "The Council does not record a breakdown of costs and incomes derived from all the listed items you request. The councils budget is published on the Councils website and is readily available." (in other words they cannot provide a breakdown)

3 According to them, the total number of Hackney carriage licences issued for 2007/8 was 8. WTF?, I was sitting on a rank of 17 Hackneys last night alone – WTF again?????


In other words gents, what do we do now, any ideas? The Council are breaking the law blatantly, and do not even know their own income and expenditure on taxi licensing etc.

In relation to point 1, I think the council have a point i.e. the council have decided at the beginning of the year that all fees will increase by inflation. Not saying that's right, but it's quite common for councils to do that.

In relation to points 2 and 3, I would refer the matter to the Information Commissioner http://www.ico.gov.uk/Home/complaints.aspx as clearly they are giving you the run around. I can't believe they don't know the full inns and outs of taxi/PH licensing expenditure, and if they don't then how do they come to the correct license fees?

_________________
IDFIMH

more to the point, who decides the fees, and who checks the VFM per item?

i.e. £115 (occy health) for a medical here, £45 (doctors) only 8 miles away

and "grant fees"?.....(to grant me a badge, the another to grant me a plate)

if a tv licence is one price across the ountry, why not a drivers badge and plate?

How did you phrase the questions?

From what I've seen elsewhere, freedom of information requests need to be couched in very precise terms; You get the answer to the question you asked.....e.g.

'what's the current size of the hackney trade in ABC borough' will get all sorts of imprecise responses, as opposed to:

1) How many new hackney carriage plates were issued by ABC borough council in the year 2007/8?

2) How many hackney carriage plates were renewed by ABC borough council in the year 2007/8?

3) What is the total number of hackney carriage plates existing within the borough of ABC as at 31 march 2008.

etc, etc, etc,

Sorry, don't mean to teach granny to suck eggs!

There may be others on here (JD?) who could elaborate and advise further.

Problem is that precise figures can be difficult and expensive to collate, so the RPI is just used as a proxy, as is the case in much of society and the economy.



Ditto above, perhaps it does not comply with the law, but where there are shared premises and employees and the like then it can get very costly and bureaucratic to collect precise figures, and of course cost and bureacracy are what everyone is always complaining about. Of course, if they don't have accurate figures then this may not comply with the law, but that's another issue.



Perhaps there are three-year licences? Perhaps the council is talking about new issues rather than all licences?

A Council is a District authority and exercises powers under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and the Local Government( Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 in connection with the grant and supervision of licences for Hackney Carriages, Private Hire Vehicles and Operators of PHV’s as well as the drivers of such vehicles.


The Council is empowered to levy fees for the carrying out of those functions, by virtue of S53(2) and S70(1) of the 1976 Act.



Fees charged must be reasonable and no more than sufficient in the aggregate, in respect of S70, to cover the Council’s costs in whole or in part.


It has been established in a number of cases before the courts that a Council may not derive a profit or surplus from such licensing activity.


While the question of what is ‘reasonable’ can only be resolved by challenge, it seems clear that ‘costs’ charged to accounts to be recovered by licence fee income must be commensurate with the actual and necessary expenditure of human and material resources.


It follows that the Council must be able to demonstrate that those costs charged directly or by apportionment can be identified as being relevant and proportionate

I would also be interested to have details of any ‘best value’ comparison the council has carried out in respect of its licensing functions and how it compares with the authorities it may have used as a ‘benchmark’

By virtue of the Local Government Act 1999 the authority is required to carry out such comparison.

Although a council has a statutory power to levy a fee this does not give it an absolutely free hand in relation to the scale of the fee that is levied.the impact of any increase upon the livelihood of those affected has to be taken into account,as does the scale of the increase.CONSULTATION must take place with interested parties,whether this is a statutory requirement or not, and results of that consultation must be considered by the council before the decision is made.it is important that any consultation is done fairly and the results considered properly by the council.ANY suggestion that the cosultation is a sham would be grounds for an application for leave to seek a judicial review of the final decision.
the judge in kelly v liverpool said although s53 contains no requirement for consultation, a local authority would be ill-advised not to embark upon some element of consultation with those persons who would be affected by an increase in fees (eg the drivers of BOTH hackney carriages and private hire vehicles).
Remember you only have28 days to object from the date on which the notice is first published, so keep your eye out for it.

You cannot increase fees just because of inflation or the retail price index

Councils have to plan ahead, so I'm pretty sure a case could be made by a council that they have acting properly by increasing fees by the inflation rate.

And if they have miscalculated, then they can review fees at any time.

_________________
IDFIMH

I disagree Sussex inflation has nothing to do with licence fees, just because they have been getting away with it doesn`t mean they can do it, they will only get away with it till somebody challengers them. It appears they are not even keeping proper records so how can they justify an increase?

Well most council do many things simply because they can get away with it.

Some council assess fees by doing a 3 year budget. As they wont know their exact costs 3 years in advance they have to, for want of a better word, guess.

I would rather they guessed at the rate of inflation than say 10%.

_________________
IDFIMH

The increase in the number of vehicles and licenses that we are experiencing down here can only mean a net gain in the overall income that the council derives from both the hackney and PHV trades.

If they keep no records - which I find completely unbelievable, then how can they say that there is no money for things like new ranks, or enforcement.

To say they are a law unto themselves is an understatement.

Needless to say, we are going to p*ss on one or two fireworks very shortly, as a matter of course

I will light the first firework for you Doc send them this letter please feel free to amend ie dates,names ect

Licensing of Hackney Carriages and Private Hire Vehicles, their drivers and Operators.

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.
Section 70 - Fees and Charges.


Enquiry submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Information requested from the Council to allow Doc G to consider the current scale of fees and charges by reference to the costs chargeable by the Council to the Cost Centre(s) covering the licensing of Taxis.

I ask the Council to provide the following information at the earliest opportunity:-


a) Please provide a copy of any report submitted by Licensing officers to the Head of Function or any Council body to request authority to implement the most recently revised scale of fees.

b) Please provide a copy of the financial estimates for the operation of the Taxi Licensing function for 2007/08.

c) Please provide details of the number of vehicle licenses, driver licenses and operator licenses the Council envisages issuing in the current year.

d) Please provide a copy of the Job description of each member of staff wholly or partly employed in the carrying out of the vehicle, driver and operator licensing function. For staff not wholly employed on such activity please advise the percentage of time charged to the taxi and non-taxi activity in their job descriptions.

e) Please advise details of the staff and management structure in respect of taxi licensing.

f) Please advise details of staff costs charged directly to the licensing account
NB. I only request details of the posts and the aggregated total annual forecast cost including all Employer’s on-costs.




g) Please provide a copy of the Subjective Cost Centre(s) Budget(s) for taxi licensing activity showing the estimated costs and income for 2007/08 against each relevant nominal ledger code. Please also supply a copy of the year to date outturn to the last available accounting period and any forecast outturn for the current financial year.

h) Please provide details of how recovery of corporate overhead and any other indirect or apportioned charges are calculated for the Taxi Licensing Subjective cost centre(s).

i) Please advise, under the Council’s Constitution and scheme of delegation, which
Cabinet member(s) and Officers have responsibility for the determination of the
Council’s policies and practice in respect of any matters relating to its powers
under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 and The Local Government
(Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

I am obliged mancityfan - you have given me a lot of ideas there.

Rest assured that I am now embarked on another quest - Indianna DocG, and the quest for the lost Revenues!