search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
...


IN THE NEWS...IN THE HYNDBURN DRIVERS GET CASH WINDFALL DUE TO ADMIN ERROR


Hundreds of taxi driv- ers are set to get a windfall because of a £210,000 council blun- der. For nine years council chiefs failed to adver- tise increases in taxi licensing fees. Now, to avoid legal action, they will refund the cash equivalent of the rises paid by private hire and hackney drivers. A probe into the mis- take


has investigations


to £400, is said to have come to light due to a legal challenge made to the authority. Hyndburn Council leader Miles Parkinson said the blame began in 2004 with the coun- cil’s previous Con- servative administra- tion. He told the Lancashire Telegraph:


“Before been


launched by Hynd- burn Council, sparking a number of discipli- nary


into council staff. The authority said it had also taken action to prevent a similar mix- up occurring again. The mistake, which could see some driv- ers being paid back up


2004, these ads had always been pub- lished, but when Peter Britcliffe leader


that


became all


stopped. Since this issue came to our attention in 2011 we have investigated our liabilities thoroughly. “We have come to the conclusion that we must


refund these


amounts to avoid legal challenges.”


Hyndburn’s Labour MP Graham Jones also said the issue was a historical one. He said: “It is just typi- cal of


the last


Conservative adminis- tration. They just decided not to bother with these ads.


It


seems that every month a blunder from the past


is being


uncovered.” However, opposition leader Mr Britcliffe called for a through disciplinary investiga- tions of the officers involved. He said: “Considering the council have been looking into this since 2011, I am stunned that I am only hearing about it now. I find it amazing I have not been spoken to about


this and was only informed by the Lan- cashire Telegraph. “The responsibility lies with officers and I would hope that a thorough investigation takes place into why they did not alert councillors.” Drivers


in Union


Street, Accrington, said they were angry at the mistake and they did not feel they were being supported by the council. Hackney driver Ash Mahmood, 45, said: “It is only fair they pay us back. We have no business left anyway and we are not making very much money. “It is very, very hard to make a living. The pay- back won’t be much each but it will make


things a bit easier.” Fellow Hackney driver Mohammed Shabir, 55, said: “When we give our fee to the council, they should be spending it or help- ing us, but they do nothing. “We have all been really


affected


because private firms have dropped their prices and the council says we have to charge a minimum of £3 at night, so we real- ly lose out. “So it is right that they should give us this money back.” The council have pow- ers to charge non- profit


taxi licensing


fees under the 1976 Local Government Act. However the council


must give 28 days’ notice in a local news- paper, inviting objec- tions. If the rules are not


followed, the


amount charged does not take legal effect and the fee is repayable. Mmmm… Here is a council


that


has


approached this whole dilemma correctly and properly – unlike a whole lot more we could mention but will not at this stage. All we can say herein is that there is currently a major


investigation


going on into the set- ting and structuring of council taxi/PHV licens- ing fees, the outcome of which could have major national implica- tions. Do please watch this space – Ed.


PAGE 48


PHTM JULY 2013


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