ROUND THE COUNCILS EREWASH:


WOKING: DRIVER ‘FORCED TO GO GREEN’ TOO EARLY


A Woking taxi driver says he is out of pock- et because he was forced to go eco- friendly too early. All drivers were told they had to get green- er engines by the new year. But now the bor- ough council has extended that dead- line by 11 months. Cab driver Andrew Ness is furious as he had already bought a new car: “I had a per- fectly good vehicle, a lot better vehicle than what I have now.” He told local radio station 96.4 Eagle: “I was told by Woking Borough Council that if we hadn’t changed by January 6th, we


would be off the road and couldn’t work. I am now out of pocket by £210 per month. “It isn’t my fault; I have only done - and other drivers have done the same - what Woking Borough Council told us we had to do.”


The Leader of the Council, John Kings- bury, said: “The drivers who do take advantage of the addi- tional time we have allowed for them to change their vehicle will only get a licence for a maximum of 11 months, at a full year price, and then they will have to renew again within 2014.


DUDLEY: PH COLOUR LIVERY RULES TO BE REVIEWED


Following a review of policy and conditions in the district, at a meeting on Wednes- day 11 December the long-standing rule stating that private hire vehicles in Dudley could only be licensed if they were white, has been removed. Ac- cording to Mohammed Farooq, Assistant Director, Law and Gov- ernance of Dudley MBC, “the Taxis Com- mittee agreed to allow private hire vehicles and hackney carriage vehicles to be any colour. The new any- colour policy will be effective from 1st June 2014.


“The Committee also agreed that the private hire vehicles will need to display two door signs, one on the front offside and the other on the vehicle’s near- side passenger door. The vehicles will also display a roof sign that complies with the current PHV condi- tions.”


Dudley Private Hire and Taxi Association


PAGE 22


had been calling for Dudley Council to revisit its colour policy. Earlier last year Coun- cillors had voted to keep the previous rules, arguing that this allowed customers to identify fully licensed private hire vehicles. But Association mem- bers continued to argue the case since signing a petition, which resulted in the Taxis Committee reviewing the policy. The association’s rea- soning was that white cars are more expen- sive because of the popularity of the colour, with some even forced to spray their vehicles to com- ply with the single- colour scheme, which had been introduced in 1996. These costs are added to already high insurance premi- ums and fuel prices, group members claimed. The associa- tion also argued that customers were used to seeing both white and silver PHVs due to neighbouring bor-


oughs having different colours.


A report by Phillip Tart, director of corporate resources, which went before Councillors, says: “The Taxis Com- mittee recently con- sidered the matter on March 13 [2013]. The Committee resolved that the proposal to amend the policy in relation to the colour of private hire vehicles, to allow the introduction of two colours, to be refused. Since this meeting the private hire trade have requested that the Taxis Commit- tee reconsider their decision.”


In April around 100 pri- vate hire drivers took their cars to the streets of Dudley town centre to hold a go-slow protest as part of its campaign, blasting their horns as they went past the council house.


Mmmm… Success at long last! Delighted to hear of this result; no doubt the licence hold- ers are even more so. - Ed.


“While this may have caused upset to some drivers, I hope those who are currently aggrieved by our deci- sion will quietly reflect and understand that we have acted in the best interests of the wider taxi and private hire trade following representations from their trade and com- munity represen- tatives.”


Mmmm… One won- ders whether, while those “who are cur- rently aggrieved… will quietly reflect and understand…”, they were advised by any- body to appeal against the decision.- Ed.


The council is investi- gating complaints that town taxi drivers have turned down fares because they are not profitable enough. Erewash Borough Council’s licensing team is looking into the tip-offs from taxi drivers and residents and says it is an offence for a driver to refuse fares without an acceptable reason. They have urged resi- dents to contact them if they have been or are refused a fare giv- ing the name of the taxi company and the plate number, which can be found on the front and back of the


REPORT ‘CHERRY PICKING’ TAXIS vehicle.


Cllr Barbara Harrison, lead member for envi- ronment, told the Ilkeston Advertiser: “The vast majority of the taxi trade operate legally and responsibly and we know they share our concern about those drivers who illegally try to ‘cherry pick’ their fares. “I can assure the taxi trade and residents that we will prosecute any drivers found to be refusing short dis- tance fares.”


The council’s licensing team plan to undertake test purchase exercises if the problem contin- ues in a bid to identify


any drivers who break the law in this way. Any drivers prosecut- ed for this offence would face a £500 fine and the council will review their licence. Mmmm…Apart from any transgression under the local byelaws – which is an offence in itself under section 50 of the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 – it is an offence under section 53 of the same Act for any licensed hackney car- riage driver to refuse to take a fare “without reasonable excuse”. Somehow a rubbish fare does not fall into that category -Ed.


ROCHDALE: SCORES SET TO DRIVE UP STANDARDS


Proposals are current- ly open to public consultation which call for the introduction of an awards scheme which would offer pri- vate hire operators a bronze, silver or gold award, or no award at all, according to how they perform in regular assessments.


Rochdaleonline reports that licensing staff would look at every- thing from how the operators support dis- abled passengers to how many penalty points operators have accrued.


Cllr Jacqui Beswick, Cabinet Member for Licensing and Regula- tion at Rochdale Borough Council, said: “These proposals will help ensure that our drivers are the best in the business and should help customers make an informed decision about who they travel with.” To receive a gold award, operators would need to fulfil a range of criteria includ- ing having a customer service charter, ensur-


ing drivers complete a full daily inspection of their cab using a check sheet and hav- ing a robust system in place to communicate to drivers messages from the police and other agencies.


Firms would lose points for, among other things, failing to cooperate with licens- ing staff, allowing unlicensed drivers to work for the company and not taking action against drivers follow- ing customer com- plaints.


Stephen Campbell, who runs Heywood- based taxi firm Car 2000, welcomed the move and said: “These changes will bring the taxi industry up-to-date. Oldham Council already run a similar star-based scheme and this will really raise the stan- dards for taxi firms across the borough.” Companies would dis- play their rating on their vehicles and at their operating base to help customers decide who they want


to travel with.


A second proposal, which is also open to public consultation, would see individual hackney carriage and private hire drivers accrue penalty points for a number of infringements.


Examples of how driv- ers could fall foul of the rules include unreasonable prolon- gation of a journey to hike up a fare (four points), modifying a vehicle without per- mission from the council (six points) and failing to behave in a civil manner (one- 12 points). Drivers who rack up 12 points or more could be stripped of their licence.


Find out about the pro- posals in more detail at www.rochdale.gov. uk/consultations or contact the Licensing Section on 01706 924 114 for further infor- mation.


The consultation will end at midnight on 26 January before a final decision is made by the council’s cabinet.


PHTM JANUARY 2014


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  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96