Taxi Driver Online

This is a bit confusing - seems like he got a temporary plate, but can't get a permanent one because of the PHV cap.

Maybe some of the Glasgow guys on here will know - why would he have been granted a temporary PH plate, but now can't get a permanent one because of the cap?

I can see why he wouldn't get a plate because of the cap, but can't understand the bit about the temporary plate which won't be made permanent.


Glasgow private hire car driver's bid to operate own vehicle rejected

https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glas ... s-29392638

Shabbir Ahmed appeared before members of the licensing committee on Thursday to request a private hire car licence for three years after spending £18,000 investing in his own vehicle.

A private hire car driver who has been operating across Glasgow for nine years has had his application to use his own vehicle refused by the city council.

Shabbir Ahmed appeared before members of the licensing committee on Thursday to request a private hire car licence for three years after spending £18,000 investing in his own vehicle.

But the bid was denied by councillors as a result of the council’s over provision policy which says there is a limit of 3450 private hire car licences operating in Glasgow.

During the meeting a representative for Mr Ahmed confirmed that the applicant had a clean licence and had not been in any incidents.

He said: “Mr Ahmed was granted a temporary licence last year and invested £18,000 in purchasing his own car as he thought he would get a permanent licence, otherwise he probably would not have made such a big investment.

“He has a wife and child to provide for. If he were to lose this licence it would be devastating for him.

“Mr Ahmed was of the understanding that this licence would not just be temporary - that is why he made the investment. We would like this to be granted under exceptional circumstances.”

Chairman and councillor Sean Ferguson said: “There is nothing to stop the applicant from applying for a full term licence but it still goes against our over provision policy.

“We are not able to renew a temporary licence unfortunately and I am sympathetic to the circumstances of the applicant but it still comes up against council policy.”

Following a short recess it was determined that the application should be refused. Applicants shall be informed of the decision in due course.

Wondered why there was no lecture from the convener in the other thread, but does this mean they've got a new one?

If so, then the council's committee information page hasn't been updated. Or maybe the normal chair is on holiday, or whatever.

(Also surprised that even the council use the term 'chair'- usually 'convener' up here, because obviously being a morally superior nation we have to do stuff like that differently )

https://onlineservices.glasgow.gov.uk/c ... +Committee

Surely they must have breached their PHV limit when they issued the temporary license.

But this situation does show how utterly stupid a restriction on PHV numbers is.

_________________
IDFIMH

Sussex, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a bit of misreporting going on here and/or there are important details missing.

Had to laugh at the irony of this, though. Saw this about six months ago, but didn't realise at the time that one of them was a licensing commitee member - oh, the irony of restricting PH numbers


SNP councillors spark security fear after going back to City Chambers for a sleep

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/poli ... r-31512679

EXCLUSIVE: An alarm was set off after Sean Ferguson and Malcolm Mitchell entered Glasgow City Chambers after being unable to get taxis home after midnight.

So they decided to use the council chamber as a free AirB&B.

And maybe it wasn’t a case of not being able to get a cab, rather the cab trade have black balled SNP politicians for nearly bankrupting many of their members with this LEZ rubbish.

_________________
IDFIMH

More on the same subject -

https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glas ... e-29441695

Both the quoted drivers seem to have been using temporary plates and then couldn't renew them or get 3-year plates because of the cap. Like Sussex, I'm slightly puzzled because AFAIK the total plates doesn't distinguish between temporary/3-year. So if they already had a plate of either type, it's surely renewable.

Don't know if any of these applicants are appealing the refusals formally.

I wonder if a higher number of drivers applied when the increase was announced, and therefore drivers have applied in good faith but others got in before them.

_________________
IDFIMH

Could be that -

For reasons of fairness to all in applying the Private Hire Car Overprovision Policy, applications for the grant of a new private hire car licence will be considered in chronological order i.e. by reference to the date and time of receipt, which includes payment received of the private hire car licence application fee.

There's still something about this story that isn't making sense to me. In 2023, the PHC cap was lifted from 3195 to 3450. If these applicants already had plates in 2023, they'd be in the original 3195.

Council licensing isn't perfect. But somehow I don't see them mishandling this many PHC applications (and allowing them to go to committee to appear on the public record). Any lawyer with decent licensing knowledge would be rubbing their hands.

I'm certainly no expert on any of it, and it might all depend on the precise wording on forms and other application materials etc.

But one phrase that springs to mind with regard to waiting lists, applications and the like from previous cases is 'legitimate expectation'

And another thing here that springs to mind is 'inside information'.

Would it be strange for the big firms to find out exactly what's happening first, given that they are in daily contact with the council, and councillors. Will they know exactly when a decision will be made, and would anyone be surprised if they were the first ones to pay the application fees?

Who knows?

_________________
IDFIMH

Do you mean it's the driver/applicants or the council/councillors who are stupid or incompetent?

But, more seriously, it does look like a case of the council taking advantage of driver, er, gullibility. Or, perhaps, lack of English language skills. And you'd certainly need a reasonable mastery of English and/or at least a bit of basic legal knowledge to penetrate it all

But, as you said earlier this year, a field day for a good lawyer who can look for holes in the council's bureaucratic and legalistic edifice...

I've got a funny feeling this is all going to blow up in the council's face, and they'll regret the day that they became the only one of the UK's 300+ licensing authorities to cap PH plates

If 283 (of 327) rejections were down to the overprovision policy, I can only see 3 explanations

- applicants didn’t read the T&Cs
- applicants did read them but decided to have a punt anyway
- GCC mishandled the applications

1 & 2 are life lessons IMO. 3 doesn’t seem likely – can’t see GCC publishing everything if that was a possibility.

I suspect many, if not all, applicants have English as a second language.

And like most in the trade don't understand the small print either.

The onus should be on the council to be more informative.

I get, but don't agree with, what they are saying re 'fettering their discretion', but surely they can tell applicants that none of the last 100 applications have been successful.

_________________
IDFIMH

Drivers deciding to take a punt on running their own car

Just about sums the whole $hitshow up in three words

And you're right as well about the 'life lessons', which I learnt within a fortnight of working in the Dundee trade back in 1996. And nearly thirty years of similar evidence elsewhere since

As for reading the T&Cs, it was pretty obvious back then that if you actually read the T&Cs and asked too many questions, then you'd be out of work at best, and potentially a lot worse