So, who is going to decide that the livery in town ‘A’ is going to take precedence over towns ‘B’ and ‘C’, and even ‘D’? Who is going to look at the local conditions of licensing of all those towns to formulate a single set of conditions? Not only that, but the bigger question is how on earth is the local ‘Knowledge’ test going to be set-up with these new much larger licensing areas as I can’t see keeping zones will be favourable?
Will the local Knowledge test even be scrapped because this would be virtually impossible to undertake? Or will it have to be adapted to take into consideration multiple combined areas instead of just one. If the Knowledge is to be kept for these new areas then will this be the death-knell for the hackney trade with potential new drivers not bothering and just going PH and slaving for the likes of Uber. How will the new single set of plate numbers be administered? And not only must the taxi/PHV plate numbers be admin- istered, but also the driver badge numbers as well? Most importantly, will there be honeypots created that will be flooded with outer areas becoming neglected?
So many questions that need to be answered.
When Brighton and Hove amalgamated in 1995 it became a unitary authority at the time. As such, whilst although still holding my breath, I did consider that with the plans for Devolution we were already in a fortunate position. Although there were talks of creating a massive new unitary authority incorporating Brighton & Hove and expanding west into Worthing and beyond. With that thought in mind this would have been devastating for the local trade here for with absolutely no doubt, the city would be the honeypot for all the hackneys in that massive area flooding in. This is something that will happen now in the newly created unitary authorities around the country.
However, the council here made different plans as it remains the Brighton & Hove Unitary Authority and instead has madea land grab to the east, snatching away small areas of Saltdean, Peacehaven and Telscombe away from Lewes District Council. The government has now given the thumbs up to this, much to the despair of Lewes DC and the people who live in those areas. This will mean, as far as I’m aware that the Lewes hackneys (what’s left of them) will not be able to rank up in those snatched areas, although I am not sure how many ranks exist there anyway and I only know of one right on the edge of the current boundary.
PHTM AUGUST 2026
But, not only that, I know that there are a few Lewes- based operators in those snatched areas using Lewes PHVs, so what happens with these operators? Well, I presume they will either have to obtain a Brighton & Hove operator licence, as where they currently are will become part of Brighton & Hove, and if they want to continue using their Lewes operator licences will have to seek a base in Lewes somewhere. I put this to Brighton & Hove Cllr Trevor Muten, Cabinet Member for Transport and City Infrastructure, at a trade forum meeting last year, but he had no idea at the time. Mind you, we have pretty much the majority of the Lewes PHVs predominantly working here anyway. So, unless there are the changes to ‘predominant working out of area’ mistakenly known as ‘cross-border hiring’, then that will not change…. which of course applies throughout the country.
Sunderland PHV driver
I was looking at a Facebook group when the subject drifted into a Sunderland PHV driver stating that his wife, who does not hold a PH driver licence, drives his PHV. When I told him this was not allowed he replied that Sunderland Licensing had told him it was OK. I told him he was given the wrong information and he came back stating that his insurance company was fine with it.
Well, I couldn’t let this drop because: 1: He and his wife could get into trouble
2: Sunderland Licensing gave him the wrong information.
So being the busy-body that I am, I contacted Sunderland licensing who informed me that this was not allowed and even quoted Benson v Boyce 1997 which showed they know their stuff. I was also informed that they would investigate who gave out the wrong information.
I got back to the driver to let him know what Sunder- land licensing had told me and advised him to seek his own clarification on the matter. Hopefully this has saved him and his wife from any future serious issues.
The point of all of this is that it crops up every now and again on different trade media groups that it seems a lot of drivers/proprietors are pretty much clueless about the trade in which they work.
Over and out from Andy 85 61
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
