Taxi Driver Online

Think that might be the case under CG (S) Act too which we always knew but with it now in writing can lodge complaint then appeal to ombudsman.

In response to our request to suspend the increase in fees the request was refused and answered.

The reasons being

"......the increase was a corporate decision and not specific to licensing. Officers have no powers to override the decision"
&
"....with reference to ongoing consultation. This is not accurate. The trade association made a complaint and we met to discuss and have since gathered data to ensure we comply with legislation. It is for committee to decide to vary fees or if the trade shall be consulted "
Finally
"
....there is no legal requirement on council to give public notice of increase in fees"

12 Fees for taxi and private hire car licences.

A licensing authority shall charge such fees in respect of taxi and private hire car licences and applications for such licences as may be resolved by them from time to time and shall seek to ensure that the total amount of such fees is sufficient to meet the expenses incurred by them in carrying out their functions under sections 10 to 23 (other than section 19) of this Act in relation to such licences.

There's nothing in your act above? Looks like so long as the fees are sufficient to meet there costs, nothing about consulting,putting it in paper? And we thought the 1976 act was bad.you can check what the expenses are for running taxi licensing ? You say they have already supplied this? So I would say the above is fair:-(




Accurate? Fair? Or reasons for complaint?

Thanks in advance.

can anyone offer any advice cos i feel like im banging my head against the wall at the moment.....we had a badge increase from £125 per 3 years to £150 per year which was implemented in Dec 2011 at the time i wasn't very well so was unable to pursue it but the l,o told my colleagues that he didn't have to consult on badge fees and we can charge what we like i have been in touch with the district auditor they say the council are doing no wrong and today the local gov. ombudsman said they don't deal with things like this ...so is our only option a judicial review???

regards
jogra

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,

UPDATE

Dear Mr XXXXXXXX
With reference to my email below with regards to your complaint being processed to the next level in line with our corporate complaints procedure I wish to advise you that your complaint has been passed to XXXXX XXX by our corporate director for him to investigate and respond.
As your complaint is now classified as a stage 3 complaint under our corporate complaints procedure we have 23 working days to allow for XXXXX XXX to investigate and respond in full. I therefore need to amend the deadline date which I sent you on Tuesday to 7th June 2013.

They can't do a best value as they have no accounts? Just comparing what others charge is not a best value? They need to compare how much it costs them compared with the costs of other councils?
Example
Ashfield council
Staff time allocated: 3.75 FTE x 250 Working days p.a. x 7 hours = 6563
Licences in issue: Vehicles 241; Drivers 270; Operators 6 = 517
Staff hours per licence per annum = 12.693
North East Council
Staff time allocated: 7.95 FTE x 250 Working days p.a. x 7 hours = 13913
Licences in issue: Vehicles 1150; Drivers 1300; Operators 45 = 2495
Staff hours per licence per annum = 5.576

You can see the north east council is giving better value they can run there taxi licensing on 5.576 hrs compared with 12.693 by Ashfield ?

From the information provided by the Council it appears that the element of staff time allocated to the Taxi Licensing cost centre is 3.75 FTE. posts
For the number of licences currently in issue this seems to be an excessive amount.
Has the allocation of time been the subject of any objective management review?
By comparison, pro rata to the numbers of licences in issue, an authority in the North East of England has a much lower staff time allocation. That authority, after a detailed investigation by the District Auditor, following an objection from the taxi trade, employed outside consultants who analysed the Licensing function in detail and advised a number of operational improvements after identifying an excess of staff time available.
From my example the comparative data for Ashfield and the other authority which we believe suggests that the allocation of time by Ashfield Council is either excessive or requires to be validated by an objective review.

The above analysis requires further investigation and submits that the time allocation for staff is unreasonable pending the provision of any data the Council has to justify the costs charged into the Licensing account.
What data has the Council assembled in relation to any ‘best value’ exercise covering the licensing functions it carries out?

Get the idea? The reason I have set the example is so you can use it for complaint to the ombudsman ?

Also you were not given the opportunity to read the licensing officers responce to your objection and that you believe that it was not properly considered? You did say there are no minutes?


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? They have no accounts so they can't ?

Well it is now June 10th and still no reply. Do I now make a complaint about the complaints procedure or do I now go to the ombudsman?

The latest reply from the licensing officer is that as far as she knows, no one collates the information that I am requesting. Does anyone know which councils do have the information? It seems that Ashfield and at least one in the north east do.

Do you think that he has any legal qualifications to pass an opinion in the legislation?

No, but he might have past it by a council solicitor.