PAPER B3

Purpose: For Decision

Committee: LICENSING PANEL

Date: 17 OCTOBER 2003

Title: TO REVIEW THE ISLE OF WIGHT COUNCIL’S HACKNEY CARRIAGE TABLE OF FARES

REPORT OF THE HEAD OF CONSUMER PROTECTION

PURPOSE/REASON

1. To review the Isle of Wight Hackney Carriage table of fares applicable to all four licensing zones.

2. Having carried out four previous formal consultations with the taxi trade upon requests for a Hackney Carriage fares review, the most recent consultation shows that the majority of people who responded are in favour of a review.

3. A further request has been received from the Isle of Wight Taxi Proprietors Association.

DETAILS

4. On 6 August 2003 a request for a Hackney Carriage fares review was received from the Isle of Wight Taxi Proprietors Association (IWTPA).

5. Details of the IWTPA’s relevant costings are set out at Appendix 1.

LOCATION & SITE CHARACTERISTICS

7. Examples from the existing table of fares, the IWTPA’s proposed fares and Officers’ proposals are set out at Appendix 2. .

8. These examples are for 1, 2, 5 and 10 mile journeys for 2 passengers on tariffs 1, 2 and 3 with no extras added.

RELEVANT HISTORY

9. The last Hackney Carriage fare increase was agreed in 1997.

10. A request for a fare review was received from the West Wight Proprietors Association in 2001. After consultation with the trade Officers refused the review as the majority of the trade were not in favour.

11. A further request for a fare review was received from a proprietor in 2002 and again refused after full consultation.

12. In early 2003 a request for a review was received from the IWTPA.

13. Before taking the matter further, officers requested that the IWTPA supply a copy of the minute of the meeting when their members had requested a review along with a list of members attending the meeting. A response was never received, and the request was later withdrawn.

14. In late May 2003, a request was received from Shanklin Taxi Proprietors who had attached their names to the proposal. After consultation this showed the majority of proprietors who responded were in favour of a fare review.

15. On 6 August 2003, another request was received from the IWTPA, as a result of an open meeting on 27 May 2003, which was open to all proprietors, members and non-members of the IWTPA.

16. Officers met with representatives of the Isle of Wight Taxi Proprietors Association on 3 October 2003 to discuss details of their request. Officers acknowledged that no increase had been granted since 1997 and put forward a counter proposal.

17. Prior to this meeting officers requested in writing a copy of the minute of the IWTPA’s meeting of the 27 May 2003 and a list of all proprietors who attended the meeting. This has not been forthcoming.

18. The Licensing Panel will be aware that a league table of fares is collated by the National Private Hire Association (NPHA), and published in their official newspaper, the Private Hire and Taxi Monthly.

19. In February 1999 this Council was at the top of the league table as published by the NPHA, for being the highest fare in the country over a two-mile journey.

20. This Council is currently (Sep 2003) no. 54 out of 376 Local Authorities in the U.K (including the Isle of Man) where trade associations have informed the newspaper of their Council’s fare structure (see Appendix 3). An A3 colour copy has been circulated to members of the Panel, under separate cover. Further copies can be obtained from Committee Services.

21. If the proprietors request is approved, IW Council fares would become the second highest in the league table. If officers’ proposal is approved we will become 29^th in the table.

22. The cost of living index of the Isle of Wight would appear higher than on the mainland due to a low salary structure and the expense of transporting essentials from the mainland.

23. The rural nature of the Island and the number of towns have resulted in people travelling to work, and for shopping and entertainment. Where taxis are used, this can often result in considerable “dead mileage” which increases operating costs.

24. Some taxi proprietors have previously stated that their livelihood is controlled completely by regulations and the setting of fares. The Licensing Panel may wish to consider whether the Council should continue to set the fares or let market forces dictate.

25. A small number of other authorities already allow the taxi trade to set their own fares and those authorities which responded to this Council’s request for information have stated that they do not have any significant problem using this system.

26. Members should be aware that if granted an increase, taxi proprietors are not obliged to change their meter, but if they do not, they can still only charge what is displayed on the meter.

27. The Licensing Panel may wish to know the number of proprietors who attended the meeting on the 23 May 2003 and the number who voted for the review.

28. There are 107 proprietors or part proprietors of Hackney Carriages on the Isle of Wight.

29. Officers are not aware of any Association on the Isle of Wight representing drivers who are not proprietors.

COUNCIL POLICY

30. Although not mandatory under the relevant legislation, historically, the Council or its predecessors has set the maximum rate of fares to be charged.

31. The fares were set by Byelaw under the Town Police Clauses Act 1847 until approximately 1978 when they were set by the Council under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 Part 2.

FORMAL CONSULTATION

32. Not applicable to the current request.

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS

33. If the Panel approves in principle an increase in fares, any representations will be as a result of a public advertisement being placed in the Isle of Wight County Press.

34. Any objections, if not withdrawn within 14 days of the advert, will have to be considered and a further date will be set no later than two months after the original date for any new fare structure to commence.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

35. Broadly, Council expenditure on Licensing matters and, in particular, those which are administered and enforced through Consumer Protection, balances income received from licence fees.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

36. The relevant legislation in this case is the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 Part II Section 65(1) which is set out below:-

“A district council may fix the rates of fares within the district as well for time as distance, and all other charges in connection with the hire of a vehicle or with arrangements for the hire of a vehicle to be paid in respect of the hire of hackney carriages by means of a table (hereafter in this section referred to as a ‘table of fares’) made or varied in accordance with the provisions of this section.”

37. Each case should be considered individually so as to comply with the rules of Natural Justice.

38. In arriving at their decision the Panel will have taken into account all relevant matters; and not taken into account any irrelevant matters.

IMPLICATIONS UNDER THE CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998

39. Without prejudice to any other obligation imposed on it, it shall be the duty of each authority to which this section applies to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

IMPLICATIONS UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

40. Members are advised that this application must be considered against a background of the implications of the Human Rights Act 1998.

There are three convention rights which need to be considered in this context:-

a) In the case of article 8 there shall be no interference by a public authority

with the exercise of this right except as such in accordance with the law and is necessary on a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of the country, for the prevention of disorder and crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

b) Article 1 of the first protocol states “no one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and the general principles of international law. The preceding provisions (of which articles 6 and 8 are but two) shall not however in any way impair the right of the state to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to control the use of the property in accordance with general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties”.

c) The Panel need to be clear as the rights granted and the need to ensure

that the reasons given for any interference are proportionate and in

accordance with the Council’s legitimate aim.

OPTIONS

41. To grant a fare increase in accordance with IWTPA’s proposal.

42. To grant a fare increase in accordance with officers’ proposals.

43. To grant any other fare structure deemed reasonable by the Panel.

44. To decline to set fares and let market forces determine the level.

45. To seek further information prior to making a decision.

46. To refuse a fare increase.

EVALUATION/RISK MANAGEMENT

47. Officers have considered the implications under the Human Rights Act and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act Part II Section 65(1), and agree that there are already risks involved with the existing fares, but it is not believed that this will change greatly if an increase in fares is approved.

48. This matter has been discussed with the Compliance & Risk Management Section and it is believed it is the applicant’s responsibility to carry out their own risk assessment in relation to their own or their employees’ safety.

49. Insofar as any risk to the Council is concerned, the issue of Crime and Disorder and Human Rights have been evaluated. Any resolution the Panel makes is within its delegated powers.

RECOMMENDATION

50. Members are requested to determine the application.

APPENDICES ATTACHED

51. IWTPA costings. – Appendix 1

Tables of existing and proposed fares. – Appendix 2

Copy of Sep 2003 league table of fares. – Appendix 3

BACKGROUND PAPERS

52. Checklist for this report in relation to the Human Rights Act, Wednesbury principles, and proportionality.

Contact point: John Murphy, tel 823152

ROB OWEN

Head of Consumer Protection