Taxi Driver Online

Stratford-on-Avon District Council revokes private hire operator licence for Claremont Cars

https://www.stratford.gov.uk/news/press ... tem/138495

Stratford-on-Avon District Council has revoked the private hire operator's licence held by Claremont Cars, based in Honeybourne, Evesham, under Section 62a of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, due to repeated and serious breaches of licensing conditions.

The action was taken in the interest of public safety after Claremont Cars continued to breach the terms of its licence despite receiving prior warnings from the District Council.

This follows a previous decision in July 2024 to revoke the dual driver licence of the owner of Claremont Cars after a Licensing Panel hearing. At that time, the business was permitted to continue operating under its existing private hire operator licence. However, the company has since demonstrated continued non-compliance with licensing requirements, raising significant public safety concerns.

The breaches included:

• Driving a private hire vehicle without a valid private hire driver's licence.
• Allowing an unlicensed individual to drive a licensed vehicle.
• Operating two private hire vehicles without road tax for a 15-day period.
• Failing to notify the District Council of vehicle damage within the required timeframe.
• Not providing proper journey records.
• Failing to meet the mandated twice-yearly MOT and taxi compliance testing.
• Permitting an uninsured, non-licence holder to drive a private hire vehicle.

Julie Lewis, Head of Environmental and Neighbourhood Services, said: "Public safety is our highest priority. The deliberate operation of private hire vehicles without proper licensing or insurance puts passengers and other road users at unacceptable risk. The District Council will not tolerate behaviour that compromises safety, and we will continue to take firm action to uphold the standards expected of all licensed operators in the District.

"The licensing system is in place to protect the public. Operators and drivers who fail to comply with these legal requirements will be held to account. We take these matters very seriously and will not hesitate to take enforcement action where appropriate."

I'm wondering if the partner of the owner perhaps used the vehicle to go to the supermarket

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

Aren't they all the same thing?

_________________
IDFIMH

Presumably the first one is aimed at the driver, while the second and third charges relate to the operator or proprietor. Struggling to see much difference between the second and third, though.

Maybe the middle charge relates to an HC rather than PHV, and are under the different Acts?