Taxi Driver Online

Nothing particularly new here, but makes a change from Manchester, I suppose

And quite good statements from the council in terms of the legal position etc, at least compared to some other councils, not to mention the likes of Unite etc.


Hundreds of Liverpool private hire drivers using licences from city 88 miles away

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/li ... s-31655517

A Freedom of Information request has revealed how many licences were granted in 2024

Almost 500 private hire licences were granted to drivers with Liverpool postcodes by Wolverhampton Council in 2024. Though passengers may expect private hire drivers to have been licensed by their local council, current legislation means they can work outside their licensed area.

A number of these drivers are registered in Wolverhampton, and their vehicles are now frequent sights when booking journeys in Merseyside on apps such as Uber. It is understood that the main reason drivers register in Wolverhampton instead of the region they operate in is because it's regarded as an easier, quicker, and cheaper licensing regime.

Wolverhampton Council has denied, on a number of occasions, that its licensing process is easier and cheaper.

A Freedom of Information request made to the City of Wolverhampton Council has now revealed the local authority issued 479 private hire driver licences and licenses for 695 private hire vehicles to applicants with Liverpool postcodes in 2024.

Additionally, earlier this year, a Freedom of Information request revealed that 96% of Wolverhampton taxi and private hire drivers licensed in the last year live outside of the council authority area.

Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has highlighted the prominence of Wolverhampton licences and has called on the government to change the law to mean that drivers should be licensed locally.

Mayor Burnham pointed out that more than 11% of England’s private hire vehicles are licensed by the City of Wolverhampton Council, up from below 0.5% less than a decade ago.

The Merseyside-born Greater Manchester leader has called for the government’s English Devolution Bill to both devolve power over taxis to Mayoral Combined Authorities and put a stop to ‘out of area’ licensing.

Regarding the issue in Greater Manchester, the mayor said at a press conference in April: “The taxi licensing system is demonstrably a broken system. In our city region, we are on the verge of not licensing the majority of our taxis.

“We’re just about hanging on. But if the growth [in out-of-area] licenses continues, we will no longer licence the majority of our taxis.”

Last month, regarding the issue, Liverpool City Council’s cabinet member responsible for licensing, Councillor Harry Doyle, said: “This is a national issue, and while we fully understand the frustration felt by some drivers, unfortunately, without a change in legislation, there is currently no action we can take.

"As the law stands, drivers with vehicle licences issued by other authorities are legally permitted to operate in Liverpool, and the City Council has no legal power to prevent this.

“It’s important to note that many of these drivers are, in fact, based locally. However, they choose to obtain their licences from areas such as Wolverhampton, where the licensing criteria differ.

"This is often due to the more robust standards set by Liverpool City Council, such as comprehensive training requirements, which we’re very proud of, as residents and visitors traveling around the city can expect the highest standards from our licensed taxis.

“The leader of Liverpool City Council, Councillor Liam Robinson, has formally raised these concerns with counterparts in Wolverhampton and we are committed to continuing discussions with other local authorities and the government in order to push for legislative changes that will address these issues and better support both drivers and passengers in Liverpool.”

The ECHO has approached Wolverhampton Council for comment.

At a rough guess I'd say that the numbers are back to front there


Has it? I thought in fact that was precisely what they had always claimed, although generally using a bit more elaborate spiel


Again that's another important point that's often lost in the translation.

And, in a piece like this, funny there's no mention of you-know-where either. (More letters to rearrange - n-o-t-f-e-s )

the free market in licensing is here to stay so instead of whinging maybe councils should becaome more competitive. Oh wait that might cut their profits they make on licensing.


oh and Stuart this is a general comment on the frequent appearance of similar stories not a direct response to this particular one.

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

Wondering if maybe TaxiPoint has embellished this a bit?


Liverpool City Council pledge public support to Mayor Burnham’s ‘Backing Out Taxis’ campaign

https://www.taxi-point.co.uk/post/liver ... s-campaign

Liverpool City Council has publicly backed Mayor Andy Burnham’s “Backing Our Taxis” campaign, aimed at reforming England’s taxi licensing system.


...and I don't just mean the usual thing of making a bit of a meal out of a brief post on Twitter/X.

So, as far as I can tell, the above is based on a brief tweet by Liverpool's licensing function, so maybe the headline above overeggs it a bit:

Of course, that's not to say that the full council wouldn't back Andy Burnham's campaign if put on the spot about it, but...

And who'd have guessed that folks in the Liverpool's licensing department would take a dim view of drivers getting badged and plated elswhere to then work in Liverpool?

Anyway, the Liverpool sticker uses the same wording as one of the Greater Manc graphics. And nice to know that the likes of Wolves cars simply can't be trusted

I wonder if the likes of Sefton and Knowsely cars can't be trusted either, or is that OK because they're within the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority area? (Rolls of the tongue, doesn't it...)

As per earlier, surely the driver/vehicle numbers on this FOI response are back to front?

Anyway, don't know if the numbers tell us very much, particularly as you don't know if the numbers are specifically for grants as stated, or includes renewals? Somehow doubt the numbers are new grants, but who knows?

And do the figures mean Wolves employs 109 LOs in the sense we normally regard them?

https://wolverhamptonportal.icasework.c ... VQGQ%3D%3D

I suspect they show that kind of number in their audited taxi/PH accounts, but I also suspect at least half of them work in different council departments.

_________________
IDFIMH