TAXI AND PHV: BEST PRACTICE
CONSULTATION RESPONSE FROM THE NATIONAL PRIVATE HIRE AND TAXI ASSOCIATION, JUNE 2022
Responses to the proposals have been limited to those we consider to give cause for comment.
POINT-BASED ENFORCEMENT SYSTEMS
Licensing authorities license a range of activities other than taxis and PHVs, operators and drivers, to include pubs, clubs, off-licences, bookmakers and casinos, street trading, tattooists, other cosmetic treatment, charitable collections and even sex shops.
NPHTA believes that the taxi and private hire trade often suffers from a negative perception by the general public which is mirrored by licensing authorities which perhaps wish to be seen to take a stricter and tougher regulatory approach than with other licensed activities. This only serves to reinforce such negative perception and has obvi- ous implications for driver safety with drivers and their vehicles often being subject to attacks and vandalism, often completely unprovoked.
Instead of point-based systems, licensing authorities should, where appropriate and legally applicable, apply the same uniform enforcement regime and regulatory approach to all their licensed stakeholders. If a point-based system is not used to regulate a licensed tattoo parlour or nail bar it should not be used to regulate licensed drivers.
Regulators have at their disposal in the event of breaches of legislation or licensing requirements, the option to issue informal and formal warnings that are a far more effective means of communication than issuing an arbitrary number of points, which in itself is often a cause for dispute in terms of perceived proportionality between the licensed trade and the regulatory authority.
Determining the fitness and propriety of licensed drivers is a formative process by nature for which such a summative approach is clearly incompatible.
A fairer, more effective, more proportionate and less arbitrary approach would be an escalatory system of informal warnings, formal warnings, suspensions of limited duration up to a maximum of say, 28 days under delegated powers, with the power to issue suspensions of longer duration or licence revocation being reserved for a licensing committee of elected members. The exception would be where any transgression is clearly an issue of public safety as outlined in Section 52 Road Safety Act 2006.
46
It is worth noting that the judgement in R Singh v Cardiff 2012 disapproved of, even if it did not expressly outlaw, point-based systems.
Equally, licensing authorities, including TfL, should not automatically revoke licences of drivers for points on their DVLA licences until 12 points have been accrued.
It is disproportionate that a HGV driver carrying up to 44 tonnes in weight or a PSV driver who may carry up to 73 passengers loses their licence for 12 months upon accruing 12 points, yet a HC/PH driver licensed by some licensing authorities may face a seven-year ban for only 6 or 7 points.
DRIVER LICENCE PROFICIENCY
It is for the above reason that we support requirements for new applicants for HC and/or PH drivers’ licences to undergo appropriate additional driver assessment which could also be used for existing licensed drivers, but only in such cases where their standard of driving may have been called into question. If a pattern of behaviour causing concern has been established through a series of complaints or the driver having 9 or more points on their DVLA licence, the requirement to take such a test would be appropriate. If an existing licensed driver fails such a test they should be referred to a licensing committee for consideration of their fitness and propriety.
Such additional driving assessment would bring licensed HC/PH drivers to an equivalent level of perceived standing as other professional drivers in the eyes of the public as well as bring obvious safety benefits.
DRIVER LICENSING – VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND ASSESSMENT
This should be left to each licensing authority to determine, subject to consultation but as a minimum, drivers should receive training in disability awareness and safeguarding. Drivers should never be required to undergo ‘refresher’ training where they repeat the same courses that they have already undertaken except where updates that may be far more detailed than a simple update bulletin are needed.
JULY 2022
Naturally, enforcement officers would always have the option to prosecute through the courts in the event of offences being committed, where appropriate.
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
