IMMEDIATE NLCA PRESS RELEASE
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Below is a statement on behalf of the NLCA concerning the licensing of limousines, I am sure that you will be concerned over the contents just as all sensible operators are. After years of striving to get every limousine on the roads into either PSV or PHV licensing, the industry has been dealt a blow which, especially in the current hard economic times, could see the demise of many an operator. For years we have campaigned for more, better and specific legislation, and after being consistently refused and told to work within the existing licensing framework, we find that the goal posts have not only moved, but may have been taken off the pitch.
I trust that you will use our statement to highlight the current and future problems that operators who want to comply with the law may face.
Yours Sincerely
Bill Bowling
Legislation Officer
National Limousine and Chauffeur Association
3rd March 2010
I have been informed yesterday that, as a result of a meeting of the Traffic Commissioners earlier this week, that they have decided that “after clarification from the DfT” they will no longer issue PSV licences for the operation of small vehicles.
The result is that many operators, who have spent time, money and effort in attempting to become licensed, are now being left out in the cold, unable to gain either PSV or PHV status. This on its own is disastrous, but what makes it even more damning is the statement that the Traffic Commissioners will be readdressing those already licensed, and quote “with a period of grace, may have their PSV operators status rescinded”. The poorest form of law is retrospective legislation, and this would rank as abysmal. I have not as yet received the courtesy of any formal contact from the Traffic Commissioners regarding their statement of intent, despite their own mission statement that “we are committed to being a good partner”. As both a stakeholder and the legislation officer for the National Trade Association for limousines, I have not been involved with any of the considerations or decision making process.
After years of working with VOSA, the Traffic Commissioners and the DfT operators, and in particular, the NLCA feels that the Traffic Commissioners have abdicated their responsibilities on the lines that it is easier to refuse than to sort it out. After a joint stance between VOSA and the NLCA to promote the licensing of limousines, and the past support of the Traffic Commissioners, I am extremely disappointed to find that, presumably at the behest of the lead Traffic Commissioner on limousines Mr Nick Jones, that the whole panel of Traffic Commissioners have withdrawn their support.
Only a year ago I listened to Mr Jones congratulate an operator of eight passenger limousines on gaining his license and welcoming him to the fold of legal operators. The NLCA does not accept the Traffic Commissioners statements, and intends to challenge the decision at every license application. What was the point in creating “small vehicle rules” “limousine and novelty vehicle rules” and to keep accepting applications and payments just to do a complete about face on policy? Even now the initial press statement just released on the matter is unclear; it does not say if all small vehicles are included in this ruling, or whether or not it is purely limousines. Questions about the great number of operators who have built businesses based on the previous grant of PSV operators licenses remain, what can they do when their licenses are due for renewal?
I feel that the whole of the limousine and chauffeur industry has been seriously let down by the DfT and the Traffic Commissioners, promises made in the past by the senior Traffic Commissioner Mr Philip Brown to work with the industry turn out to be hollow. Years of striving to achieve a good working relationship with the Traffic Commissioners appears wasted.
The DfT has compounded the problem by lack of clear and definite guidance, wishy washy statements to local licensing authorities, coupled with the vagaries of the Local government miscellaneous provisions act (1976) means that we still have over one hundred of the four hundred and four local licensing authorities who do not license limousines, and around another hundred who pay lip service to licensing limousines. For a local authority to state that they will license limousines and then add “but no left hand drive vehicles” “no side facing seats” “no non type approved vehicles” and so on is a smoke screen to state that they comply when they never had any intent to do so. I currently have around thirty pages of restriction from different local licensing authorities, including the most ridiculous one, which emanated from the DfT, stating that “No American stretched limousine shall look like, or purport to be a London style black cab”. With statements of this ilk how can operators view either the DfT or the local licensing authorities with any serious form of respect?
The local authority licensing rules are inadequate in its maintenance regime. With a maximum of one MOT test and two further inspections per annum, this means that limousines may go from seventeen to fifty two weeks between inspections, again another case of tick all the boxes even if the wheels fall off the wagon. The NLCA has always maintained that the maximum time interval between inspections should be ten weeks, and under the PSV route this has become the accepted norm. This should be addressed by the DfT as a serious omission when considering licensing.
Imagine the scenario when all the small limousine operators, both existing and proposed, have their PSV operators licenses revoked, add to this the 50% of local licensing authorities who do not or will not realistically license limousines. The industry will revert to the dark ages of operators running unlicensed. With no realistic or a sensible and consistent regime, anarchy will rule. Drug dealers, money launderers, and the like will flourish; good honest businesses will either die or turn illegal to exist. VOSA with its limitations on finance and manpower will not be able to adequately police the law. The police will continue to have very little understanding of the law governing limousines, and uninsured and unlicensed operators will once again become the norm.
After years of trying to convince operators that the DfT, VOSA, Traffic Commissioners the police and the NLCA are all on the same side, I now find it increasingly difficult to support this argument, and now feel that we are effectively on opposing sides with less common ground than ever in the last thirty years.
I have implored the DfT and Traffic Commissioners to look at the latest decision again, consider the ramifications, involve the NLCA at the decision making stage, and finally commit to a positive programme of licensing on a national basis (under the administration of the Traffic Commissioners) for all limousines both up to and over eight passenger seats. The problem is surmountable with the will of government and the commitment of all involved.
If any operator of a limousine, novelty vehicle, business car, minibus or people carrier of less than nine seats capacity currently works under a PSV “O” license, then they are at serious risk of losing their livelihood. The NLCA needs every operator who may be affected to join in the campaign and support what will inevitably be a long, arduous and expensive series of challenges through the courts.
The NLCA will be calling an extraordinary meeting in the near future to establish the route forward, every operator in the UK is invited to attend and all offers of support in any form will be gratefully received.
Bill Bowling
Legislation Officer
National Limousine and Chauffeur Association
http://www.nlca.co.uk/news.php
Login
Register
FAQ
