ALL THINGS LICENSING Guildford, for example, has adopted the following test:
Would I be comfortable providing sensitive information such as holiday plans, movements of my family or other information to this person, and feel safe in the knowledge that such information will not be used or passed on for criminal or other unacceptable purposes? Would I also be confident that this person would operate a professional and reliable service, at a time it is needed, and take reasonable steps to safeguard both passengers and the ability of the local licensing authority to protect the public if required?
If the answer to the question is an unqualified “yes”, then the person can be considered to be fit and proper. If there are any doubts in the minds of those who make the decision, then further consideration should be given as to whether a licence should be granted to that person.
As such, the test makes it implicitly clear that operators licensed by the council should utilise vehicles and drivers licensed by that authority so as to ensure that the licensed trade working in the area conforms to the standards set and can be the subject of local compliance.
In addition, as part of the council’s fit and proper test, it would not expect an operator to obtain a licence in that area simply to make vehicles licensed by another authority available for booking via sub-contracting on a regular basis. As such, any operator acting to deliberately reduce the council’s ability for local control would not be meeting the required public safety objectives and standards expected of a professional, licensed, fit and proper private hire operator, and may have its licence to make provision to invite or accept bookings in the area revoked.
The test also works for those larger authorities which have vehicles working outside that area, as by using large number of vehicles out of district, the operator is placing an additional burden upon the authority through having to respond to complaints which took place some distance away, again reducing control.
INTENDED USE POLICIES Chapter 6 of the draft Best Practice Guidance also 72
included the concept of intended use policies, where hackney drivers are undertaking predominantly pre- booked work in another area, going so far as to suggest that such a policy should be introduced. This formal recognition of such policies in order to try and reduce out-of-area working is welcomed.
TESTING STATIONS
As some licensing authorities have expanded into issuing licences on a large scale, the number of testing stations has also expanded, in some cases allowing tests to be completed many miles away from the area issuing the licence.
Most inspections of vehicles on application and during the licence are carried out under provisions at s.50 of the 1976 Act which states: “the proprietor of any hackney carriage or of any private hire vehicle licensed by a district council shall present such hackney carriage or private hire vehicle for inspection and testing by or on behalf of the council within such period and at such place within the area of the council as they may by notice reasonably require”.
Therefore, the Act implies that testing stations should only be located within the area of the authority licensing the vehicle, raising potential questions about the practices of those authorities which allow testing outside their area.
LICENCE CONDITIONS
The Knowsley case presented additional arguments which included that it may be lawful for a council to adopt appropriately worded conditions which promote the principle of localism with regards to private hire licensing.
As such, there is perhaps an argument that all licensed drivers could be subject to a condition that they are not to wait to receive bookings outside the council’s licensed area. Correspondingly, drivers could travel to any destination to pick up an arranged booking, or receive a booking while they are travelling between destinations, but they could not wait outside of the area to receive bookings.
While the legality of such a condition is untested, if this were universally adopted then it should reduce
DECEMBER 2022 PHTM
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 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
