inspection, this should be fairly straightforward to assess, if your council operate an in house testing arrangement it will be a case of one department internally charging another, naturally at minimal cost save for a small administration fee to organise a test date and of course the test itself. If the test is outsourced, again it should be
Stands, its reasonable to suggest private hire shouldn’t be paying for a rank they legally cannot
brush and the bored looking bloke whose jeans
the reasonable cost of administration in the supervision of hackney carriages and private hire vehicles. The supervision part obviously covers a degree of enforcement, which is not exactly an inexpensive activity when enforcement exercises
all barrelled together and make up the license fee, although a number of local authorities kindly allow the test to be paid for separate, particularly if the test is outsourced.
some hidden discounts and costs now associated
Some local authorities set different charges for different vehicle ages, some local authorities offer a discounted fee for vehicles using bio fuel and other eco friendly vehicles, some offer reduced
authority can charge for; in respect of vehicles this can be surmised as; inspections, ranks, administration and supervision. Quite simply, a person licensing a vehicle should pay for the costs attributed to the licensing function;
costs of the licensing function do not differ on
appear to be outside the remit of the charging power allowed in the act. A local authority could offer incentives; but from a fund available from another department that will remunerate licensees, who all, in my opinion, should pay the same fee.
Those other hidden extras
The fees set out on LA websites are in some cases misleading, in others highly dubious to say the least. Some licensing authorities inadvertently charge an administration fee for the inspection
to section 42 of the 1847 act they shouldn’t, the following legend is stated;
“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.”
charges a higher fee to a non-resident than a
local
the bounds of what is actually chargeable in the scheme of the act, how much is a stamp these
one individual to another should be nothing more
local authorities who charge a nominal fee as
in the register, others however charge a totally disproportionate amount for the actual man hours the transfer would actually take. One LA charges £10.50p to change an address, whilst at the same time charging £156.00p for a change of proprietor. Now that’s a serious increase in the
has the following legend borne on their fees list;
“Issue of Caution Notice/letter for administrative purposes following suspension, late application or late production of documents £25.00”
Again, I don’t see this as a chargeable function the LA can make under the terms of the act. Indeed, I would say it was possibly contrary to the act.
21 day period doesn’t actually begin until the notice is served. The LA has to serve the notice as a part
did last month allude to the taxi trade in London
number of their carrot munching cousins outside London seem to do the same.
In these times of recession, many LAs are looking
costs. As you all should know, the licensing
function itself should be self funding. This means despite the recession, unless licensees stop licensing vehicles etc the department should be effectively recession proof. This is why I take exception to the comments attributed to one local
taxi trade call for greater checks;
“That’s not going to happen at a time when the council is considering major cutbacks.”
If the council attributed to the above quote is considering cutbacks, then the ONLY
who should expect lower fees. Statements like that actually suggest the council concerned is
to fund other functions. Having spent a good amount of man hours trawling the internet and
number are seriously taking the urine with cab owners, statements like the above don’t exactly help persuade me otherwise. It’s like paying for a painter to decorate your house, then asking him to do the plumbing. Obviously there is a need for all local authorities to sing from the same hymn sheet when it comes to licence fees. Surely the combined brains of the DfT and Audit commission could and should come up with some clear enforceable guidance in respect of what the taxi trade can expect and how the local authority can work out fees, but are they all in it
Don’t get me wrong here; some local authorities along with their overstretched licensing
some seem to see us as income, are the ones who will take the headlines, to the detriment of all. Indeed, after all of the above 2700 odd words I do have a few words of warning. I have heard of cases where alleged trade consultants will be brought into areas by trade representatives
consultants charge the local trade to represent them at meetings in connection with fees, they are paid win, lose or draw. You should be aware the cost of a licensing department in a large metropolis will be more expensive than in a rural area, before you question fees make sure you know the facts. I intend to place a league table of licence fees on the NTA website in due course; input is invited from all, when your fees increase let me know and changed will be made.
Copyright Wayne Casey 2010
24
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44