Taxi Driver Online

. We point out this is not correct and are told that if all costs were added up it would be even higher, so don't push it.


That seems to be a standard scaremongering tactic and one that was said at the meeting this week with our council.
My answer is that if all costs are correctly accounted and the costs work out at more than anticipated, so be it but the important part is that they are correct.

_________________
Grandad,
old fart with no heart

Any further advice appreciated.

VAT is charged at 20%

They must ( ) have had the accurate budget outgoings to work out what they need to finance the taxi/PH licensing function. So why wait to May?

Have you asked any of this under the FoI Act?

I am way out of my depth though and hoping they don't realise.

Reply received pointing out that all variable fees were increased not just licensing fees and promising a reply to questions by Fri 3rd May.

This is the latest email I have sent to the complaints department. I have also copied the Chief Executive in the email.

Dear sir or madam,
I wish to make a complaint about the way the licensing department has handled the increase in fees that came into force on April 1st 2013.
I believe that the way in which the fees were increased was unlawful because the correct procedure as laid out in the local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) act 1976 section 70 were not followed. Paragraph 5 of the act states that
"If objection is duly made as aforesaid and is not withdrawn, the district council
shall set a further date, not later than two months after the first specified date, on
which the variation shall come into force with or without modification as decided by
the district council after consideration of the objections."
The word Shall means Must not May or Maybe but Must.
So because the licensing department refuse to set a further date they are in breach of the act. Also despite asking for the information to enable me to work out the true costs for the licensing function, no usable information has been received. Furthermore it seems that the objections sent into the council were dismissed at a meeting between the Head of regulatory Function and the licensing officer without any elected member of the council present and with no minutes being taken. I believe that meetings to discuss matters like this should be open to the public but despite many people asking for details of the meeting none were informed of any such meeting.
I ask that the rises that were implemented on April 1st 2013 be suspended pending the outcome of this complaint.
Regards,

In response to my complaint regarding the date of implementation on 1st April 2013, the response is "there is no requirement for the new date to differ from the original date or for it to be later."