Taxi Driver Online

Every plate is attached to a vehicle so what happens to the vehicle? To obtain or renew a license you have to produce documentation to prove you are the owner of the vehicle along with a valid certificate of insurance. In England and Wales It is an offence not to disclose any third party involvement and as you can see it is quite specific.

We can take for granted the activity you describe is unofficial and therefore illegal, at least in England and Wales. If anyone comes across legislation or a court case that allows an unregistered person to own a plated vehicle then please let us know?

Regards

JD

I'll check out the details tommorrow JD, from memory I think a number of councillors were actually renting them out allegedly anyway.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Challoner vs. Evans 1986, reported in the Times 22 November.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

And the verdict was? lol.

I would have sworn I posted this case on TDO and I am loathe to post it again but I will post it if only to make the point that it is "illegal" not to declare any third party interest in a hackney carriage vehicle application.

This case is fully explanatory, which begs me to ask questions as to the validity of the Case you and Mr Thinker referred to in respect of HULL. Are you quite sure there was a case in Hull or did you mistake Hull for Crawley?

The immortal words of Croom Johnson who handed down the first judgment.

In my view, on the facts as the Justices found them, Mr Evans was not concerned in the employment for hire of any Hackney carriage by Mr Holledge. It was Mr Holledge who was employing the Vauxhall Cavalier for hire. The same position would have continued had the licence been granted in accordance with the application which was made on the 29th November 1984. It is quite clear on the facts found by the Justices that it was Mr Holledge and nobody else who was the proprietor of the Hackney carriage.

In those circumstances, in filling in his own name as the sole proprietor of the vehicle Mr Evans did commit the offence with which he was charged. I would accordingly remit this case to the Justices with a direction to convict.


Regards

JD

JD,

I'm reasonably sure something happened in Hull, and it had something to do with certain councillors renting out plates.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

WHAT,WHAT EH? renting out plates you say, thatz wot theese tozzers that drive Landan cabs do, their all BNP, rent theere cabs out 2 ileeegal emmigrants rant rant rant etc. . .

Join the GMB ProFFessional drivers branch I say, EH, or try to say, Call 999, oops i meen 07965 44........ EH EH??






LOL.

As you know, TDO prides itself on its accuracy, so any information on this Hull case is most welcome. In fact, any comment from yourself regarding the Evans case would also be welcome, especially considering your position in the NTA.

Regards

JD

No, you buy a plate, the vehicle is an option, you ring the Council up, you sign a declaration at the Council, saying you are the new plate owner and it is transfered into your name, there and then, you scrap the banger or tell the last owner who you bought the plate off, I don't want the vehicle, just want the plate, you take a new vehicle down to the Council testers with the plate in your hand, they take the old plate off you and give you a tempory plate, till your plate is made .

Thats whats happens, but have no idea in the meantime about checks, crb, fit and proper etc etc., but as these people who buy the plates are not working them, they don't need all that, only the operator licence

Every two years or so I write to the Council, a letter, stating who has a business interest in my plate, the co owners of my plate are my wife, she doesn't drive, my son, and two daughters, this letter protects me from loosing the plate back to the council, if anything happens to me, my wife or the kids get the plate with no snatch back from the Council, there are no checks carried out to the business interested parties

my son has no intention of using the plate, if he got hold of it, this would just be used as a business investment, unlike me who works it.

I'll try and find out JD, its kinda bothering me now!

The situation concerning plates and ownership obviously leads to far more issues, such as multi plate holders etc.

The judge clearly states This case has to be approached on the basic principle that a Hackney carriage licence attaches to the vehicle and not to the owner of a vehicle.

I have personally always been of the opinion that the plate belongs to the local authority, the proprietor is licensed, a license is a permit or permission, nothing more, nothing less.

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

And I think it's the exact opposite.

_________________
IDFIMH

Right now I'll let someone else explain the license formula and what constitutes issuing a license and what significance a plate has when attached to a vehicle. I can see this is going to be a long drawn out process especially when you are obviously only considering transfers in authorities that restrict licenses. I doubt you would find anyone in the City of London purchasing a plate or indeed anyone in the 70% of authorities that don't restrict numbers. You are wrong to say you buy the plate because the plate is just part of the licensing process issued to identify the vehicle.

What you probably mean is that you buy the license, the reference to "plate" is a term that has been handed down for decades, the only significance it has in respect of licensing is that it is attached to a vehicle displaying a number. Licenses are transferred but only when they have already been allocated to a vehicle, regardless of the status of the vehicle. Whether or not the new license holder wishes to retain the licensed vehicle or simply renew the vehicle, is entirely up to him. However, at all times as I stated, the license relates to a specified vehicle.

Regards

JD

I agree

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I suggest anyone who is unsure about the status of a hackney carriage license in England and Wales, should read the Weymouth case.

http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2376

Regards

JD

You are right, the plate does belong to the local authority and you have to return it when they ask you to return it. The plate is only a symbol to show that the carriage is licensed.



The vehicle is licensed and the proprietor is the license holder. Or as you put it, the "permit holder".

As the Evans case stated, without a licensed vehicle you cannot be a proprietor. The Weymouth case is the forerunner to that logic.

Lets examine the most pertinant points in that case.

The commissioners may from time to time licence to ply for hire within the prescribed distance, or if no distance is prescribed, within 5 miles from the general post office of the city, town, or place to which the special Act refers, (which in that case shall be deemed the prescribed distance,) such number of hackney coaches or carriages of any kind or description adapted to the carriage of persons as they think fit.’

The legislation doesn't say the commisioner may from time to time license individuals to ply for hire. It specifacaly states Hackney coaches.

This prompted Lord Goddard to say.

That seems to be a reasonably clear section, and, if we give it the ordinary meaning which the English language bears, it is clear that the commissioners are to license a "vehicle" as a hackney carriage.

Lord Goddard goes on to explain the very points I have already made in relation to hackney carriage vehicle licenses.

‘Before any such licence is granted a requisition for the same, in such form as the commissioners from time to time provide for that purpose, shall be made and signed by the proprietor or one of the proprietors of the hackney carriage in respect of which such licence is applied for … ’

Observe here that there is no direction in this section that the proprietor has to make an application for a licence for himself. The requisition is to be filled in and signed “by the proprietor of the hackney carriage in respect of which such licence is applied for.” That appears to show that it is the vehicle which is licensed, and not the person owning the vehicle. Section 40 continues:

‘… and in every such requisition shall be truly stated the name and surname and place of abode of the person applying for such licence, and of every proprietor or part proprietor of such carriage, or person concerned, either solely or in partnership with any other person, in the keeping, employing, or letting to hire of such carriage … ’

Section 41 seems to be also of considerable importance:

‘In every such licence shall be specified the name and surname and place of abode of every person who is a proprietor or part proprietor of the hackney carriage in respect of which such licence is granted, or who is concerned, either solely or in partnership with any other person, in the keeping, employing, or letting to hire of780 any such carriage, and also the number of such licence which shall correspond with the number to be painted or marked on the plates to be fixed on such carriage, together with such other particulars as the commissioners think fit.’

There, again, the section contains a clear statement that it is the hackney carriage that is licensed. It would have been simple in that section (as, indeed, in s 37 or in any other section of this part of the Act) to refer to the licensing of the proprietor to keep a particular carriage if Parliament had so intended. Parliament, however, seems to have emphasised in the sections I have read that the licensing is the licensing of a carriage, and not of any particular person.
Section 42 is:

‘Every licence shall be made out by the clerk of the commissioners, and duly entered in a book to be provided by him for that purpose; and in such book shall be contained columns or places for entries to be made of every offence committed by any proprietor or driver or person attending such carriage; and any person may at any reasonable time inspect such book, without fee or reward.’

The object of this section seems clear. It gives the public a right to inspect the register of hackney carriages which must state who the proprietor is, so that, if the public have reason to bring an action for personal injury or otherwise, they may see who the proprietor is who can be sued. By s 43:

‘Every licence so to be granted shall be under the common seal of the commissioners … or … be signed by … the commissioners … and shall be in force for one year only from the day of the date of such licence, or until the next general licensing meeting, in case any general licensing day be appointed by the commissioners.’

Section 44 provides that notice shall be given by the proprietors of hackney carriages of any change of abode. I think s 45 ought to be noted:

‘If the proprietor or part proprietor of any carriage, or any person so concerned as aforesaid, permits the same to be used as a hackney carriage plying for hire within the prescribed distance without having obtained a licence as aforesaid for such carriage, or during the time that such licence is suspended as hereinafter provided, or if any person be found driving, standing, or plying for hire with any carriage within the prescribed distance, for which such licence as aforesaid has not been previously obtained … ’

he shall be liable to a penalty. Contrast these sections with s 46:

‘No person shall act as driver of any hackney carriage licensed in pursuance of this or the special Act to ply for hire within the prescribed distance without first obtaining a licence from the commissioners … ’

In my opinion, the effect of the sections clearly shows that the licence is granted to the carriage and that it remains in force for a year from the time when it is granted or until the next annual licensing meeting of the commissioners. What then is to happen if during that year a change of proprietorship takes place? There is the vehicle, which has its licence attached to it. There is nothing in this Act which provides that the vehicle may not be sold, or may only be sold with the consent of the council. There is no provision here to say that, if a person has obtained a licence for a cab and disposes of it, or dies, he must surrender his licence. What is necessary is that the register should be kept in order and kept up to date. Therefore, it seems to me that, by necessary implication, a person who buys a cab which has been licensed is under a duty to go to the authority and say: “I am now the proprietor of this cab which you licensed for a year. Please, therefore, enter me in the register as the proprietor, and enter my name on the licence granted in respect of the cab, instead of that of the earlier proprietor.”

We are not concerned to consider whether or not Parliament might have made different provisions. Parliament seems to have said that a licence to a cab, if the commissioners grant it, is to be given for a year. I cannot think it was meant—and I think the necessary implication is the other way—that, if that cab is sold during the year, the person who buys it is not to be allowed to use it during that year. He may not get his licence renewed, but that raises entirely different questions. Once the licence expires, as it will do, at the end of the year, then he will have to put in a requisition in respect of the cab which he wishes to use as a hackney carriage.
781

In my opinion, the council have viewed this matter from a wrong angle. One of the councillors, I noticed, did raise this question in an acute form at one of the meetings. He said he wanted to be advised whether the licence was to the cab or the man with the cab. Had it been pointed out then, or had this court given a decision then, that the licence attached to the cab and not to the man, I think it is possible that the council might have come to a different conclusion. I think also the council had probably been misled to some extent by the form of the licence which they had been in the habit of issuing. It is to be noted that the section in the statute does not prescribe any particular form of licence, nor, indeed, does it prescribe any particular form of requisition for a licence, Section 40, as I have already said, provides that the requisition is to be in such form as the commissioners shall from time to time provide for that purpose, but the form of licence which is used in the borough of Weymouth reads in this way:

I think this goes some way in clarifying the status of a hackney carriage license.

Regards

JD

Therefore the renting out of the plate, without vehicle, should not only be impossible but illegal?

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin