COUNCIL CONUNDRUM


NORTH YORKSHIRE TAXI DRIVERS FEAR CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS FOR ILLEGALLY PLYING


A legal wrangle has broken out over how North Yorkshire’s new council regulates taxis and whether this is, potentially, leaving drivers open to prosecution by the police for accidentally breaking the law – or not.


The alleged legal problems have been highlighted by David Wilson, a leading licensing consultant for the trade. He claims that since April 1, when North Yorkshire Council (NYC) took over hackney carriage licensing from the now abolished district councils, the new unitary authority said all hackneys may ply for hire on all ranks and streets across the NYC area. However, Mr Wilson claims that in its rush to introduce a single area for taxis across the county, the council had not followed the legal procedure to create single hackney carriage licensing. He says as the council has failed to acknowledge its error and to take remedial action to comply with the current legal position, since the situation was brought to its attention in June, trade representatives were set to report the council to the Ombudsman. Mr Wilson, who founded A2Z Licensing in 2009, argues the law says it is illegal for anyone to ply for hire in an area for which they are not licensed. On conviction, a fine of up to £2,500 may be imposed. As a result, he adds, hackney carriage drivers are concerned that they might still face prosecution by the police, and fines from the courts on conviction, even if they do not expect North Yorkshire Council would prosecute them for plying illegally, as the council has


PHTM AUGUST 2023


already decided it wants hackney carriages to be able to ply for hire throughout the area. Richard Fieldman, formerly a Harrogate DC hackney driver, said: “We only discovered the council may not have followed the legal procedure to


create a single


licensing area, when we approach- ed a licensing consultant about the council applying different rules to hackneys licensed in different parts of the county, even though we were now supposed to be one area, subject to one set of rules.” Prior to the creation of NYC, taxis were licensed by each of the seven district councils: Craven, Hamble- ton, Richmondshire, Ryedale, Scarborough, Selby and Harrogate. This meant hackney


carriages


could only ply for hire on ranks and streets in the area of the district council where they were licensed. Mr Wilson took action to write to NYC’s monitoring officer in June, asking him to investigate the council’s legal position on the matter. In response, the council said he had raised “important issues”, but added it did not agree it was facilitating the illegal operation of hackney carriages within its area. A council spokesman said: “The council has been clear through its communication, consultation and within the Executive report that the council intended to create a single hackney carriage zone.” Mr Wilson said: “Although ad- mitting an error was made may be embarrassing for the new council and those licensing officers and lawyers involved, we are all human and make mistakes.


“What is important is that the council acknowledges its mistake and takes urgent action to comply with the law, restricting hackney carriages to ply for hire in one of the former seven district council areas until such time as the council legally merges them into a single area. “Members of the public can, however, be reassured that a hackney carriage is insured, even if plying for hire illegally in an area in which it is not licensed.” In response, NYC’s corporate director of environment, Karl Battersby, said: “We have received the letter and are taking legal advice on the points raised. We will be responding as soon as we can.” NPHTA comment: There are additional issues at play here too, such as the fact that whilst the vehicles have all been issued with the new design logo signifying being licensed by North Yorkshire Council, the drivers have


not


received any matching badges, which in the eyes of the law means, that the driver is not actually licensed to drive that vehicle. There is a mix and match of conditions between the former authorities which remain in place, regardless of the fact that there is supposed to be only one set of identical conditions across the new licensing region. Many more issues have been raised and subsequently dismissed out of hand, as we can see by


the


response in this article to David Wilson. The NPHTA is also working with the local associations and reps on the various aspects.


15


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