SEND & SCHOOL TRANSPORT
KENT TAXI FIRMS ATTEMPT TO DEFRAUD COUNCIL OF NEARLY £30,000 IN UNMADE SEN SCHOOL TRIPS
Kent County Council (KCC) has uncovered nearly £30,000 in fraudulent invoicing by taxi firms claiming payment for home-to- school trips that never occurred. Between April and August 2024, 15 instances of “invoicing irregul- arities” were detected with a value of £29,649 of invoicing for services not being delivered. This was revealed through cross- referencing school attendance records with taxi company payment claims. The home-to-school transport (HST) service, which caters to approximately 6,000 special needs pupils and costs Kent taxpayers around £70 million annually, has
become a target for fraudulent activity. Councillor Ros Binks, Chair of the Governance and Audit Committee, said: “I’m assuming all invoices are checked and there are systems in place to pick up irregularities. I’m not surprised irregularities happen, for all sorts of reasons including error, but councils have always been fair game because of a historic lack of checking. “We have been pressing for a change in that culture, not least because KCC has to watch every penny it spends.” The offending companies face warning letters, contract suspensions or terminations, while
the council will recoup the overcharged sums through future invoicing, or via invoice if this is not possible. Green Party councillor Mark Hood, who sits on the committee, highlighted the need for vigilance, added: “This is in the context of a £68m budget and 6,000 children with special needs being transported by taxi each year across Kent. “Of course, there may be the odd invoicing mistake but, never- theless, everything should be done to ensure nobody is paid more than they should be to take these children to and from their schools in safety.”
HEREFORDSHIRE CABBIES ACCUSED OF CHARGING DOUBLE FOR COUNCIL SCHOOL CONTRACTS
Herefordshire taxi drivers are reportedly earning exorbitant sums from council school transport contracts, leading to claims they are neglecting other fares and leaving residents without nighttime taxi services. The allegations come after it was revealed Herefordshire Council spent nearly £6 million on school contracts in the last financial year. John Jones, former Hereford Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Association, claims that: “It used to be that if you took on these regular contracts, they would be at below meter rate,” he said, “but now such contracts are often at double the equivalent rate on the meter.” He attributes this surge in pricing to
a supply and demand PHTM APRIL 2025
imbalance, exacerbated by stringent council requirements and the lingering effects of the pandemic. “I know of one car that makes a thousand pounds a week going to and from Leominster, when the rate should be less than half that,” Jones stated. “A lot of those drivers then take the rest of the day off, and won’t come out at night.” Jones further alleges that some registered operators are “farming out” council contracts, taking a cut before passing them on to other drivers.
Online advertisements for driver positions, promising £800 a week, further illustrate the lucrative nature of these contracts, a figure “which you won’t earn from
regular taxi work,” according to Jones. “So Herefordshire people are losing out twice over – by paying over the odds and not being able to get a taxi when they need one,” he said. Herefordshire Council has responded by announcing an “external review of our home to school transport services,” which will “explore commissioning and contracting arrangements.” “The outcomes of this will help to inform the development of any future plans.” Figures released by the council show that in the last financial year, over £5.8 million was spent on taxi services for 496 pupils, with over half of those pupils having special educational needs and disabilities.
13
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 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86
