Taxi Driver Online

Amazing that this is on the same website as yesterday's article, but not a peep about the earlier piece

But, it seems that this is all about a new station near Chelmsford, while yesterday's was about the old station.

Anyway, while permit systems are normally for ranking on private land owned by the rail companies, this is about council land, apparently. Which is obviously a less common scenario for railway rank permits, but pretty sure it does happen, so I suspect the HCA's legal sabre rattling here will fall on deaf ears


Council plan to charge taxis to use new Beaulieu station would 'compromise public safety'

https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n ... se-9891603

The Chelmsford Taxi Drivers Association has accused the council of trying to profit out of the new station

Public safety could be at risk if plans go ahead to charge taxi drivers as much as £1,500 for permission to wait for customers at the new station at Beaulieu. In order to manage the number of taxis accessing the taxi rank at Beaulieu station, Chelmsford Council is looking to issue a limited number of permits to hackney carriage drivers —up to 50 permits in the first year.

Chelmsford City Council owns the land allocated for the new station taxi rank at Beaulieu Park railway station and says it will manage it accordingly. The council has said the permit price for Beaulieu could be between approximately £500 and £1,500.

There are about 200 black cabs, 100 of which pay £1,200 for permission to use the rank at Chelmsford Station, which Greater Anglia owns. However, Chelmsford Taxi Drivers Association said they believe it is “unjust and unlawful” for a council to profit from the licensed trade - regardless of where the funds end up.

A statement on behalf of the Chelmsford Taxi Drivers Association claimed the council wanted to “double permit” the drivers - saying they already pay to license their vehicles as taxis. The association said: “Any refusal to allow a locally licensed hackney carriage vehicle from using a locally adopted taxi rank would be an offence and a complete waste of council funds, and any suggestion otherwise would be, in our opinion, misplaced."

They add that their advisors feel the council could be open to legal challenge in court if it proceeds with the proposal. It adds that charging and controlling numbers would discourage taxis from occupying that rank, which could compromise public safety and convenience.

The statement continued: “Furthermore, by charging and controlling numbers would discourage the entire trade from occupying that rank, which then undermines the very need to ensure that there are enough taxis available, thereby compromising public safety and convenience. Ensuring that sufficient taxis are available to transport the public home safely and promptly should remain a key priority for the council, as it reflects the primary purpose of the Hackney Carriage service.”

A spokesman for the council said: “Chelmsford City Council is the landowner of the area allocated for Beaulieu Park rail station’s taxi rank. As such, it is responsible for implementing a system that manages vehicle access to the rank, both accommodating passengers’ needs and preventing clogging of routes into and out of the station.

It is common practice for rail station taxi ranks to require permits, allowing a limited number of vehicles access. On Thursday, January 23, the council’s Regulatory Committee agreed to a consultation regarding the proposal for use of the taxi rank at Beaulieu Park station to require a permit. This proposal will be open for consultation for six weeks, with consultees including all taxi operators and drivers within the Chelmsford City Council area as well as other interested parties. Following the consultation period, all responses will be brought back to the Regulatory Committee for members to consider.”

This is on the outskirts of Chelmsford and I would have to wonder if there will be enough trade to justify that money surely a nominal fee for the first year might be a better idea

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Looks like the permits are being pitched at the lower end of the suggested costs above. But, of course, the fee will always be too much for the trade, but realistically they're going to have to pay something

But no doubt it'll all take a year or two to settle down - the drivers who take up the initial allocation may end up being quids in, or it may just be money down the drain...


Taxi rank fees at Chelmsford's new Beaulieu Station 'could leave commuters stranded'

https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n ... w-10044821

There are concerns the plans could cause safety issues for people leaving the station

Chelmsford City Council has been warned that introducing taxi rank fees at the new Beaulieu Station could create safety issues for commuters. The GMB union representing hackney carriage taxi drivers said that many will choose not use the taxi rank if they have to pay a licence for the privilege.

And they add this could lead to vulnerable elderly people and women being stranded without an easy way home. Councillors are being faced with a recommendation for the initial allocation of 30 permits - each costing £500 per year.

Additional permits will be issued as required to ensure that the taxi rank the council owns at Beaulieu Station, is working effectively, the council adds. The issue of whether or not to introduce taxi rank fees will be discussed by councillors on March 27 - about a month after the council agreed to postpone a vote to allow more feedback.

When the issue was set to be discussed in January the council had been looking to issue up to 50 permits in the first year- each costing between approximately £500 and £1,500. There are around 200 black cabs registered in the area, 100 of which pay £1,200 for permission to use the rank at Chelmsford Station, which Greater Anglia owns.

However, Chelmsford Taxi Drivers Association said they believe it is “unjust and unlawful” for a council to profit from the licensed trade - regardless of where the funds end up. The GMB for Professional Drivers (London Region) said it hopes "common sense will prevail” in the face of safety concerns.

A spokesman said: “We are concerned about the proposed restriction and charges for the use of taxi rank at Beaulieu Station which will have adverse effects on our members carrying out their legitimate business in the area. This will create safety issues for commuters using the station because of the likely shortage of drivers at late in the night when drivers will opt not to ply the route on the basis of the charges.

"Commuters will be stranded especially vulnerable people such as elderlies and women. The public have right to be able to access transport services at all time without any hindrance. The purpose of trying to drive users to the new station will be defeated if it turns out that they will be stranded with limited access to secured transportation.

"The committee should reconsider the proposal and look away from profiteering as there are so many other ways of raising fund than putting residents at risk. We hope common sense will prevail.”

Another representation to the council plan echoed the concerns about safety. It said: “Limiting the number of taxis and imposing fees will ultimately fail to meet passenger demand, particularly during operating hours of the station.

"A key concern is public safety, especially late at night, when passengers arriving at Beaulieu Station may find no taxis available to take them home. This could leave vulnerable individuals with no choice but to walk alone in the early hours, increasing personal safety risks.

"It is essential that this committee considers the working realities of taxi drivers. Drivers have the right to operate freely within the borough, naturally gravitating to areas where they are most likely to secure fares.

"City-based ranks potentially offer more frequency of work, including higher-value longer journeys. In contrast, the anticipated demand at Beaulieu Station will likely consist of local trips serving Beaulieu, Channels, and parts of North Springfield, making it a less attractive rank for many drivers.

"As a result, there is a significant risk of limited service at Beaulieu Station, particularly between 11pm and the early hours of the morning. During this time, many taxis will be stationed at higher-demand ranks such as City Station, Viaduct Road, Baddow Road, and Bond Street.”

Due to open by the end of 2025, the new station is hoped to ease pressure on Chelmsford station, reduce car journeys, and tackle local congestion and pollution.

When did councils get the powers to charge drivers for sitting on taxi ranks?

_________________
IDFIMH

Good question, Sussex. I hadn't really thought about it in that way, and was just focusing on the numbers and price, sort of thing. But certainly an unusual arrangement for the council to actually charge for access to a rank on council-owned land (unlike the other Chelmsford station rank, which as the council says is a private arrangement between the trade and Greater Anglia. Or the likes of Soton Council issuing permits to access the dock ranks, which is an arrangement between the council and landowner ABP.)

Had a look at the council papers , and this paragraph is probably the best explanation of what's going on in terms of how we normally view these things:


So although it's very unusual, I suppose it's no different in principle to councils charging car parking fees, say

There are a couple of pages about it all in the official papers here, if anyone's interested. And it's mainly about fleshing out the stuff earlier about managing access and numbers etc. Starts on page 11:

https://www.chelmsford.gov.uk/media/4zp ... a-pack.pdf

It is technically private land but would still require a byelaw to allow it's use as a such but I'm sure that would have been all taken care of during the initial planning stages. I suspect the fee's are down to the council having put money into the scheme and want a return on their investment ? Or the train operating company wanting income from the site other than through train fares

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Possibly a unique situation, unless someone can point me in the direction of another one.

I know that some airports and docks are jointly owned or run by councils, but this appears to be a 100% council-run rank. Or at least 100% of the money is going to the council.

The other matter that I would take issue with if I were the local GMB man is why on earth is the licensing committee dealing with this. I note that members are only considering the feedback to send to the cabinet recommendations, but this isn't a licensing matter. It's a planning or similar matter.

But more to the point why on earth are licensing officers, being paid by license fee payers, getting involved with this? License fee payers pay good money to ensure the licensing function functions, they don't pay licensing fee money to enable the council to progress a money-making non-licensing scheme.

_________________
IDFIMH

Yes. Can't be bothered going through it all with a fine tooth comb, but funny the way the quote above is saying that the permit scheme has nothing to do with the licensing function, but they're asking the licensing function to endorse it?


That said, I'm sure it's all legal and above board in a broader sense, although certainly a very unusual arrangement.

But not where local authorities own the land, and are charging for the permits

Of course, maybe it is about managing traffic and the like, as portrayed in the official papers. But who knows? I somehow doubt if the council will be making a mint from it, though, once all the costs of the scheme etc are considered.

Taxi drivers warn they won't pay to use rank at Beaulieu station if proposed plans go ahead

https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-n ... y-10062456

Drivers remain unconvinced by the plans - and warn the uptake 'could be zero'

Taxi drivers remain unconvinced about charges planned for a new taxi rank in Chelmsford - even though they are set to be at a cheaper rate than first envisaged. Under plans proposed Hackney carriage drivers will have to pay £200 for an initial six months for the privilege of using the Beaulieu Park railway station.

They will be able to continue using the rank, owned by Chelmsford City Council, for a further six months if they pay another £300. The offer will only be open to an initial allocation of up to 30 drivers who first sign up. Any subsequent drivers would have to pay £500 for 12 months.

But the decision has sparked warnings that Hackney taxi drivers may choose not to use the rank at all under the scheme - leading to the risk that vulnerable elderly people and women could be stranded without an easy way home.

The council has said a licence scheme is needed to manage numbers at the taxi rank and the £15,000 estimated to be earned each year to cover the costs of the maintenance of the rank. The council has said it could not find any example of any other taxi rank owned by local authorities.

Councillors are gradually softening the scheme in the face of concerns - they were faced with a recommendation for the initial allocation of 30 permits - each costing £500 per year.

There are around 200 black cabs registered in the area, 100 of which pay £1,200 for permission to use the rank at Chelmsford Station, which Greater Anglia owns. The remaining use taxi ranks owned by Essex Highways which are free to wait at.

Ian Vernon, chairman of Chelmsford Taxi Drivers Association, said drivers will operate where they are most likely to secure fares adding city-based ranks potentially offer more frequency of work, including higher-value longer journeys.

He added that in contrast, the anticipated demand at Beaulieu Station will likely consist of local trips serving Beaulieu, Channels, and parts of North Springfield, making it a less attractive rank for many drivers. Speaking after the meeting Mr Vernon said: “They are taking a huge risk. They just don't get it. It's about self employed people going where they can earn a living."

He added: "It's now down to the trade and the proof is in the pudding that if the trade will pay the money. Those people who pay to go to Chelmsford station, I can't see them paying any more to go over there."

He added that with the rank limited to 10 spaces with 30 drivers allowed to use it, it may mean some will opt not carry on if they there is not enough space.

He added: "They are asking for 30 people to pay. But if there are 20 spaces. What are those other people going to do? They are making an effort to get there and they may have to leave."

He added: "The communication between the drivers is the 100 or so that use Chelmsford station are not going to pay because they are paying enough as it is. And the other guys who don't want to pay for the station clearly won't go to Beaulieu so I think the uptake may be zero. We'll see."

Councillor Julia Frascona, member of Chelmsford City Council's regulatory committee said of the proposed price change: "I think that's a very good idea because it reduces the risk for the drivers.

"All of us are going into an unknown situation. It is less money down, they can see how it goes. If they want to continue they can pay the rest of the fee for six months.

"If they don't they can walk away and they've only paid £200. It could be that it turns out to be very lucrative and they want to continue and be very happy with it.

"But we don't know how it's going to turn out. It's less risk for drivers and hopefully it will encourage drivers to sign up for this and we have taxis at the rank which is obviously what we want to see."

The decision is now going to cabinet for final decision.

Looks daft, because it's the same £500 per annum either way. But I suppose the £200 for the first six months is just a cheaper trial period because it's an unknown quantity, and thus less of a financial commitment.


I suspect there's an important detail missing there


No, me neither

But, I mean, at which station or indeed any rank generally, does that NOT happen

Of course, if there's no scope for overranking, and the rank isn't convenient in terms of getting there and alternative ranks, then he's right that drivers might be unwilling to risk going there at all.

But a lot of their arguments seem a tad overdone, and obviously they're hoping for a free-for-all and no fee. Of course, the council could just do that for a while, and see how much drivers are willing to pay once it settles down. Can kind of see why the council just don't want to allow open access at a new station with limited spaces, though.

Problem is, of course, absolutely no-one can tell how it'll all work out, and how much drivers will be willing to pay, if anything. It could end up so unpopular that they might have to let any and all HCs in anyway, just to get the rank serviced at all. We'll see

And there I was thinking 99.9% of taxi ranks were on council-owned land. What they can't find is a council charging drivers extra to sit on that council-owned land.

If the council is that desperate that they need the extra revenue to pay for the bureaucracy that they are creating themselves, then simply amend the hackney carriage tariff with a £1 extra surcharge for station pick ups.

_________________
IDFIMH