Notes

Howards Solicitors
Taxi – press release
25th August 2011

Manchester taxi trade to fight Council’s “unfair restriction” of trade at airport
LEGAL taxi trade specialists Howards Solicitors will be representing the Manchester Cab Committee in its bid to lift alleged restrictions of trade at Manchester Airport.

Peter Eatherall, taxi law partner at Howards, will be representing the Committee’s fight to fully open up business to the trade at the airport.

The Manchester taxi trade has taken issue with the Council for giving Arrow Cars preferential treatment in its dealing with the airport and its passengers. This has effectively shut out competition, according to the Committee.

The Manchester Cab Committee brings wide support and is made up of the GMB Union, Taxi Owners and Drivers Association, Airport Taxi Association, Mantax and Taxifone.

The complaints focus on Manchester Airport’s website booking facility for taxis, as well as its booking kiosks in the three main terminals, which are devoted to Arrow Cars at the expense of rivals. There are also objections from the trade regarding Arrow Cars’ unlawful ranking activities.

The Committee now has barrister’s advice and representation through Howards Solicitors, with a possible judicial review to follow to determine the law on this matter.

Sean Kenny, chairman of the Manchester Cab Committee, comments: “We have no problem with competition. We do take issue though when a private hire office opens next to the taxi rank and misleads customers by calling themselves “Taxi Private Hire.” In addition it has vehicles illegally ranking and what can be consider unbalanced promotion by Manchester Airport. Then, it’s not fair or acceptable.”

Kenny also points out: “Manchester City Council compels all Hackney Carriages to meet a rigorous set of standards concerning issues such as driver knowledge and wheelchair accessibility at some considerable cost. Private hire do not have to meet the same high standards, including licence fees, yet are being given the opportunity of immediate hirings. This opens up another issue of fairness in the eyes of many in the trade.”

Eatherall, who has direct experience of running his own taxi firm before migrating his knowledge to law, comments: “The Council do not feel there are any issues that need to be radically addressed, but many, many voices within the trade in Manchester strongly believe that there are.”

“We have tried to resolve what we think are sound grievances through dialogue with the licensing and legal departments of the Council. We have not received a constructive response. The Manchester Cab Committee has been left with no other choice to resolve the matter other than through legal recourse.”

1,500 complaints against cabbies in Greater Manchester

August 15, 2011

A catalogue of bad behaviour by Greater Manchester’s cab drivers has been uncovered by the M.E.N.

The shocking incidents include indecent exposure, abuse of traffic wardens, failing to report accidents and refusing to pick up disabled people.

Nearly 1,500 complaints were made against drivers last year, according to figures obtained using Freedom of Information laws.

A number have been disciplined or lost their jobs, including:

A Tameside cabbie sacked for talking inappropriately to a female passenger before flashing at her;

A cab driver in Oldham given a two-week suspension for abusing a traffic warden who was giving him a ticket;

A black-cab driver in Hyde banned from driving Tameside taxis after eight complaints about him being ‘extremely’ rude.

A Tameside town hall spokesman said of the Hyde cabbie: “He made various personally insulting comments, entered into arguments with his passengers, swore at them and on occasions refused to pick up disabled passengers or passengers only intending to travel a short distance.”

Other incidents seen by the M.E.N. include another Tameside driver who received a written warning after talking ‘inappropriately’ to a female commuter.

In Oldham, town hall bosses fined five drivers for plying for hire or having no insurance – while one was convicted for failing to report an accident.

Another Oldham cabbie was convicted of plying for hire and suspended for three months – after a girl flagged him down and he drove off with her handbag in his car.

In Manchester, the town hall, which licenses 3,500 cabbies, last year conducted a ‘mystery shopper’ exercise that gave drivers a 76 per cent satisfaction rate. But since then annual complaints have rocketed from 280 to 485.

Sham Raja, of the Manchester Private Hire Association, said council officers should investigate the reasons behind the dramatic rise. He said all drivers are vetted before being licensed – but said he is ‘not happy’ about complaint levels.

He added: “Licensing need to look into this matter and see why there are these complaints. They need to educate the drivers. Personal attitude is very important – you have got to treat customers in a very good manner, not abuse them. They pay your wages.”

Coun Nigel Murphy, Manchester's executive member for the environment, said the increase is due to the council making it easier to complain.

He added anyone with a complaint can contact licensing authorities through the council website.

Coun Murphy said: “We also have more taxis operating than ever before, which makes it ever more important for the public to contact us if they haven’t received a satisfactory journey, and we are now discussing compulsory training for every taxi driver so they understand the importance of good service.”

The figures also revealed that complaints soared in Trafford – from just seven last year to 66.

Most were about bad driving, although one driver was warned not to make racist comments and another warned for being aggressive.

Rochdale has had 32 complaints this year, mostly about bad attitude and behaviour, but also mobile phone use, litter and bad parking. Stockport had 83 complaints, largely about drivers being unlicensed. In Bolton there were 268 complaints, down slightly on last year. Salford had 118 complaints and Bury 71. Wigan had 145, with a ‘significant’ number being grievances between cab firms.

Source; http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1455745_1500-complaints-against-cabbies-in-greater-manchester
_________________

A NEW taxi system, which will see changes to the way hackney carriages and the private hire trade operate, will come into force next month in County Durham.

From September 1, Durham County Council’s new policy will bring about de-zoning across the county and the deregulation of licensed hackney carriage numbers in the Chester-le-Street and Durham City areas.

This means that licensed hackney carriages will be able to pick up and drop off fares anywhere within the council’s area.

Previously there were seven different zones representing the seven former district council areas which came together to form the unitary authority in April 2009.

The council’s head of environment, health and consumer protection, Joanne Waller, said: “Currently if a licensed hackney carriage driver picks up a passenger in for example Barnard Castle or Peterlee and takes that person to a place in another zone within the county, the driver is prevented from picking up a new fare from a taxi rank or by being hailed in the street, when they reach that destination.

“That not only means that empty vehicles are being driven needlessly all over the county, harming the environment and wasting fuel, but it also means that passengers wanting to get a taxi are not able to do so.

“By removing the zones we are bringing County Durham in line with many other counties and ensuring a better service for customers, improving accessibility to taxis at peak times in all areas and enabling operations of a system which is fairer to all taxi operators and to the environment.”

The council has been working with the licensed taxi trade for a number of years and a widespread consultation programme was held prior to the Cabinet adopting the new policy.

But the move proved unpopular with cabbies in Durham, who staged a number of go-slows through the city in protest, claiming it would lead to a “free for all” in the city centre.

The taxi drivers are also opposed to a colour policy which will force them all to drive white cabs.

Ms Waller said: “There have been some concerns raised by operators in Durham City that there is not enough rank space in the city and insufficient custom to go round.

“In response we have provided 15 new spaces after 6pm by extending the rank on Claypath and providing an additional rank in certain hours on Freeman’s Place.

“Clearly we will also be closely monitoring the situation and in the city itself we are using a pilot traffic order, which can be amended if required, so that we can measure how the new systems are working.”

Detailed leaflets outlining the new operating systems are being sent to licensed taxi trade members in Durham City and information for customers is being distributed across the county throughout a network of venues.

Posters are being placed at strategic points and the new scheme will be supported by an increased police presence and enforcement of road traffic and rank regulations where necessary, particularly where non-licensed vehicles are parked on ranks during restricted hours. In addition, the experimental traffic order in Durham City is designed to alleviate potential access issues on Claypath, where the rank will be extended.

A PRIVATE hire driver in Southampton has had his licence removed after an alleged serious sex assault.

Licensing chiefs revoked his licence after Ali Najafi, of Fullerton Place, Portswood, was arrested over the alleged assault on a vulnerable female passenger.

Mr Najafi, 27, was suspended and later had his licence revoked when licensing officers considered the evidence and ruled he was not a “fit and proper” person.

An appeal to the magistrates court was rejected by District Judge Lorraine Morgan who upheld the city council’s decision.

The Crown Prosecution Service decided not to bring separate criminal charges as the complainant was a vulnerable adult.

It is understood the alleged assault took place in a private hire car that was not fitted with a CCTV camera.

Mr Najafi had held his licence since September 2008.

He was unavailable for comment.

THE limit on the number of Hackney Carriages in Thurrock has been removed.

The current limit for the number of Hackney taxis in the borough is set at 100.

Concerns were raised that removing the limit would result in an influx of Hackney Carriages to the area.

Tunde Ojetola, ward councillor for south Chafford, said: “Yes there will be the possibility that Thurrock would have an influx of people without this licence.

“There will be active reforms brought back if we have a mass influx and this is not an attack on other licensed parties.”

The removal of the limit followed a review after three years to decide if it was in the interest of the public to keep it.

A Hackney Carriage can be a London style cab and will always have a fare meter as well as carrying a white local authority licence plate.

Leader of the council John Kent added: “If we have a limit on the amount we have we have to carry out a review every three years which costs the council £20,000 for the report.

“This will be a saving for us and we would not expect an increase in the number of Hackney Carriages.”

Those present

Anthony Ferguson, Chair DfT Buses and Taxis Division
Rachael Watson DfT Buses and Taxis Division
Pippa Brown DfT Buses and Taxis Division
Simon Woodward DfT Legal
Frances Patterson QC Law Commission
Jessica Uguccioni Law Commission
Dai Powell DPTAC
Bill Bowling National Limousine Association
Helen Chapman Transport for London
Kris Beuret National Association of Taxi Users
Bryan Roland National Private Hire Association
Tommy McIntyre Unite the Union
Miles Bebbington Institute of Licensing
Bob Oddy Licensed Taxi Drivers Association
David Wilson PHV Reform Group
Julian Francis London Taxi Company
John Miley NALEO

1. Anthony Ferguson opened the meeting by setting the context and describing current initiatives - the Red Tape Challenge, the Transport Select Committee’s report and the Law Commission’s review. He explained that the purpose of the meeting was to hear what people thought were the attractive elements of the existing legislative framework which they would like to see retained and to hear any constructive ideas about amending those elements which were undesirable.

2. Frances Patterson explained the background to the Law Commission generally and the taxi project specifically. She said that the Commission had a statutory remit to modernise and simplify legislation and that the taxi project met the Commission’s criteria for accepting into their programme of work. The review would have a deregulatory objective but other than that they had an open mind on the way forward. The Commission intended to consult in the Spring of 2012 and they intended to produce a report and draft Bill by late 2013.

3. Bryan Roland pointed out that the House of Lords had strongly criticised Part 2 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill during its passage in 1976; he expressed the hope that the new legislation would be fit for purpose.

4. David Wilson said that he mainly represented PHV operators; he thought that many of them would prefer to see a single tier licensing system.

5. Kris Beuret welcomed the Law Commission’s review; she was pleased that her organisation had been invited and hoped the Commission would engage with her as she thought that the consumer’s voice had been overlooked in recent years in relation to taxis.

6. Myles Bebbington highlighted the “deregulatory objective” mentioned by Frances Patterson and asked how the balance would be struck between relieving burdens from business yet ensuring public safety. Frances Patterson recognised that getting that balance right was a central part of the project.

7. Anthony Ferguson asked the representatives which elements of the existing legislative framework they thought were good and should be retained.

8. John Miley highlighted local authorities’ ability to ensure that drivers were safe; he thought that there should be a consistent level of checking across the country – Enhanced Disclosures for all taxi//PHV drivers and a consistent standard of medical check.

9. Helen Chapman agreed that ensuring driver safety was vital – and an ability to check that vehicles were safe.

10. Bryan Roland thought that the existing system was so flawed as to contain nothing which was desirable to retain; he thought that allowing 300plus local authorities to invent their own conditions was inherently problematic and his aspiration was a new licensing system which set national parameters.

11. Bill Bowling thought that limousine drivers and vehicles must be checked.

12. Kris Beuret thought that the concept of accessibility for people with disabilities must be retained; taxis were a vital form of transport for many disabled people. She also acknowledged, though, that there was no real consensus, even amongst disabled people, about what constitutes an appropriate policy on accessibility.

13. Helen Chapman thought there should be a national standard for what constitutes “accessibility” for taxis.

14. David Wilson raised the question of who might administer taxis and PHVs under new legislation; he thought that local authorities could retain the role, but with more in the way of national standards – he saw no need for a new “taxi licensing commission”.

15. David Wilson also thought that chauffeurs were overlooked under the present licensing system. And he referred to the practice whereby Bed and Breakfast businesses, particularly in rural areas ran their own unofficial and unlicensed PHVs – simply because tourists needed the transport and it was unprofitable for licensed PHVs.

16. Dai Powell wanted to retain the concept of taxis and PHVs being an important element of public transport.

17. Tommy McIntyre welcomed the review. He thought that the way forward was to specify some national standards – possibly even a “national taxi badge” – he suggested looking at some of the sensible taxi byelaws around the country and drawing on them might be helpful. He thought that taxi licensing should be locally financed with local accountability.

18. John Miley thought it important that effective levels of enforcement were possible under any new licensing regime. He agreed that there should be local accountability.

19. Myles Bebbington stressed the importance of setting licence fees so as to cover costs and not make a profit.

20. Bryan Roland said that taxis and PHVs had not been part of “public transport” since 1981. That was part of the reason why they were never covered in Local Transport Plans. He raised the problem of licence fee rates and pointed to variations in licence fees around the country from £45 to £450.

21. Myles Bebbington thought it might be helpful to look at recent approaches to licensing in other areas eg The Licensing Act 2003 and gambling legislation. He thought the most appropriate approach was national standards administered locally – with a national fee structure (in the gambling legislation, the fees were set in “bands”).

22. David Wilson thought that a “national taxi badge” was a sensible way forward, but queried how enforcement might be financed; he mooted the idea of fixed penalty notices.

23. David Wilson queried why taxi rank provision should come out of taxi licence fees; he thought they should be provided out of wider local authority transport planning funds.

24. Bryan Roland pointed out that there was a fixed national fee for an MoT test – so thought that it should be possible to set a national fixed fee for a taxi test.

25. Bryan Roland also noted that under the Local Government (Miscellaneous provisions) Act 1976 responsibility for appointing stands lay with districts, but they needed permission from the Highway Authority and most districts were not Highway Authorities.

26. Kris Beuret thought it important to retain the concept of the “black cab” by which she meant a purpose build and recognisable vehicle which she thought gave comfort and reassurance to passengers.

27. Myles Bebbington agreed that there was a need for a clearly recognisable vehicle as a taxi.

28. Anthony Ferguson then asked representatives what they thought should be done differently under a new legislative framework.

29. Dai Powell thought that the legislation had not dealt adequately with accessibility issues; he wanted licensing authorities to have a better understanding of what sort of accessible vehicles were available and to see greater consistency of approach.

30. Kris Beuret pointed out that deciding what “accessibility” actually meant was problematic in itself; it went much further than people in wheelchairs – even disabled people were divided about what constituted an a satisfactory level of accessibility.

31. Bill Bowling wanted to see a much greater focus on maintenance of vehicles; he thought that the maximum three tests per year in the 1976 Act was inadequate and that the new legislation should include a dedicated inspection and maintenance regime.

32. David Wilson thought it important that licensing officers should be allowed to inspect vehicles from other areas which came into their district.

33. David Wilson also wanted to see the current restriction on PHV operators sub-contracting to operators in other districts removed.

34. David Wilson also suggested that if a two tier system were to be retained, all PHVs should carry a roof sign saying “Advance bookings only”.

35. Tommy McIntyre stressed the importance of effective enforcement, particularly across borders; he described the arrangements in Merseyside where five licensing authorities had agreed a concordat that they could enforce against all the vehicles and drivers licensed by any of those five licensing authorities.

36. Myles Bebbington pointed out that an enforcement officer in Area A would not necessarily know the conditions which were applicable in Area B, where a visiting driver was actually licensed.

37. Myles Bebbington also thought it vital that the new legislation was absolutely clear about which vehicles should be subject to licensing.

38. Bryan Roland thought the licensing and enforcement process required a high degree of expertise and suggested that licensing officers should have a specialist qualification.

39. Bryan Roland also queried the current position whereby there was no statutory obligation on drivers to clamp wheelchairs into place; he referred to two accidents which had arisen because the wheelchairs were not secured and thought this should be covered in a new law.

40. Bryan Roland also mentioned the issue of roof signs on PHVs. He thought that in daytime, they were fine. But at night an illuminated roof sign – regardless of the wording on it – acted as an invitation to passengers to approach the vehicle and ask the driver directly for a hiring.

41. Kris Beuret wanted to see better training within the industry which she thought would raise the overall image of the trade; she thought that such training could extend beyond customer care into running a small business.

42. Bryan Roland said that a new qualification was just about to go live and that a transport academy was being established. His vision for the longer term was a CPC for taxi drivers – similar to that which applied to bus drivers – possibly denoted by a “T1” category on the holder’s DVLA driving licence.

43. Myles Bebbington stressed the importance of effective enforcement being dependent upon various enforcement agencies interacting with each other; he mentioned in particular the importance of licensing officers being able to get information from DVLA.

44. Tommy McIntyre thought that there should be a qualification which applicants should achieve before entering the trade.

45. David Wilson highlighted the difficulties facing licensing authorities when fixing a table of fares for taxis; should the tariff be fixed at a level which properly recompensed the owners of brand new wheelchair accessible vehicles – in which case the people who stood to gain most from that would be the owners of older saloon cars whose costs were lower and who actually provided a worse service for passengers? It would not be possible to set a higher tariff for wheelchair accessible vehicles because that would have a direct discriminatory effect on the disabled people who had to use them. He thought it was easier to set a tariff where all taxis were wheelchair accessible or all were saloon cars. He stressed that he was not advocating a particular approach; he was simply raising the fact that it was a hugely problematic issue.

46. Bryan Roland said that there was a difference of £4.00 between the highest and lowest local authority fares (for a two mile journey). He thought that setting fares should remain a local function. He referred specifically to Chelmsford where the local authority had recognised that most journeys were around two miles so they decided to set a tariff which benefitted drivers who undertook these two mile journeys; the rate for subsequent miles was comparatively lower than many other areas.

47. Kris Beuret thought it problematic when local authorities adopted this “front-loading” approach to fixing fares as many disabled people travelled only short distances in taxis and this approach had a disproportionate effect on them. She also thought that plate values which were a feature of areas which a limit on the number of taxis distorted taxi fares.

48. John Miley thought that the setting of taxi fares must remain a local function; he thought it adequate that the proposed fares had to be advertised and that people could make representations about them.

49. John Miley also thought it anomalous that taxi operators were not licensed.

50. Tommy McIntyre rebutted Kris Beuret’s point about fares being distorted in areas with quantity controls; he said that Liverpool had a policy of controlling taxi numbers but it also had relatively low fares. He thought that the setting of numerical limits must remain with local authorities.

51. Dai Powell asked the Law Commission whether they would be looking at taxi licensing systems in other European countries. Frances Patterson said that they had an open mind about looking at other systems of licensing.

52. Helen Chapman raised the problem faced by licensing authorities when people applied for taxi/PHV driver licences but had been out of the country for some years; it was difficult to get any information about their criminal backgrounds – proper links were needed with other countries for this purpose.

53. Anthony Ferguson asked Helen Chapman whether she thought that, under a new legislative framework, there was any real need to perpetuate the distinction between London and the rest of the country.

54. Helen Chapman thought that London was different from other licensing areas – not least in terms of numbers of drivers (85,000). She thought it possible though that London could fit in with a national model – if the model was the right one. She stressed the importance of consistency and portability.

55. Kris Beuret thought that the review needed to take account of new technology; smart phones etc were changing the way in which taxis and PHVs were booked.

56. David Wilson raised the issue of CRB checks; he said that in response to his own recent survey there were 208,000 vehicle licences in issue and 313,000 driver licences. This, he thought, indicated strongly that many drivers had acquired driver licences in more than one area – and the problem was that each of those drivers would have had to get a separate CRB checks for each of the licence applications.

57. Myles Bebbington said that a scenario of three CRB checks in three months was not uncommon – a Standard Disclosure for a PHV driver licence in Area A; a Standard Disclosure for a PHV driver licence in Area B and an Enhanced Disclosure in order to undertake a school contract.

58. Bryan Roland thought that part of the problem was that a body which receives a CRB check in order to make a decision must destroy the information once that decision had been made. He said that the licensing authorities and trade were still awaiting new guidelines from the Home Office.

59. Bill Bowling highlighted what he regarded as a loophole in the wider legislation which allowed a person to drive a 16 seat bus even though they had been refused a PHV driver licence on account of an unacceptable CRB check.

60. Myles Bebbington pointed to the fact that under the Licensing Act 2003, members of a licensing panel must have been trained accordingly; he thought that this sort of provision should be built into any new taxi licensing system.

61. Bryan Roland thought that there should be consistency of approach with regard to medical checks for taxi driver licence applicants – he suggested that all applicants should be subject to a Group 2 medical assessment.

62. Anthony Ferguson said that he foresaw a situation where a new Act of Parliament would contain a number of powers to make secondary legislation or to provide guidance to licensing authorities. Frances Patterson agreed that this was the likely format for new legislation; she thought it likely, though, that when the Law Commission reported, they would have some suggestions about what might be included in the secondary legislation and guidance.

Buses and Taxis Division
August 2011

Teenager assaulted in Sale by "taxi" driver

Image released by police Police are looking for an Asian man with dark hair and stubble

A 19-year-old woman was sexually assaulted by a taxi driver after he dropped her off at a house in Sale.

The teenager was picked up outside Tiger Tiger in Manchester city centre in the early hours of 26 July.

The driver took her to a house on Alexandra Road and started talking to her on the street before sexually assaulting her.

She ran off and the offender drove away. Police have released an image of the man they want to trace.

He is described as Asian, about 5ft 8in (1.7m) tall and with dark hair and stubble.

Pc Kenneth McMahon said: "The victim thought and rightly expected that the driver was going to help her get home safely, instead he took advantage of her and sexually assaulted her.

"She is understandably upset by what has happened and I want anyone who recognises the driver from this image to get in touch."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-14417932
_________________

Friday, 23 September 2011

Why not all taxi drivers are hailing new planned changes

Thursday, 15 September 2011

Just two extracts from Birmingham - Licensing Offence Atrocities;

Wednesday, 14 September 2011

Operation Crush

Saturday, 10 September 2011

A Fascinating insight into "Multicultural" Britain and the taxi trade in Birmingham

Sunday, 4 September 2011

Poor Outlook for StockTax

Thursday, 1 September 2011

Steve Darlington does it again - Future Outdoor Media in Bankruptcy

Saturday, 27 August 2011

Taxi driver uses "Hamlet" as a defence.

Taken from Rainy City Rip Off

Friday, 26 August 2011

Manchester Council in Legal Battle??

Tuesday, 16 August 2011

1,500 complaints against cabbies in Greater Manchester

Monday, 15 August 2011

TAXIFONE NORTHWEST LIMITED (t/a Taxifone) Bankruptcy

Friday, 12 August 2011

County Durham gears up for new taxi system (Deregulation)

Private-Hire Driver stripped of licence after alleged sex assault

Hackney Carriage taxi limit removed

Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Taxi and private hire vehicle meeting 4 August 2011

Friday, 5 August 2011

Teenager assaulted in Sale by "taxi" driver

Monday, 18 July 2011

The report - is a load of boll ox

Sunday, 17 July 2011

The road to reform - report due Tuesday 19th July 2011

Thursday, 14 July 2011

Black Cabs to rise £3000 to meet emissions target

Press release: Manchester Bogus Taxi Rape Capital

Notes

Contact details