Agenda item

Report of Licensing Manager.

The licensing manager presented a report to enable members to consider the outcome of the recent consultation on the requirement relating to access and egress of hackney carriage and private hire vehicles and whether the requirement should be maintained or amended.

Members were reminded that at the Licensing Regulatory Committee meeting on 2 September 2010 an updated version of Rules, Regulations and Procedures for Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing had been approved. The purpose of this update had been to consolidate all information into one document which could then be issued to all licensed drivers, proprietors and operators. The document clarified the rules and regulations for the benefit of drivers, operators and proprietors as well as licensing officers. 

The document approved on the 2 September 2010 had included the requirement that:

“Access to all passenger seats must be unimpeded. Clear access and egress to all passenger seats must be provided, without the need to tip forward, fold or remove seats.  This will apply to all new and replacement vehicles licensed after this policy comes into force. If a seat has to be removed to comply with this requirement, it shall be removed from the nearside of the vehicle, from the row of seats, which are situated behind the front passenger seat.’

This requirement had been introduced on the grounds of public safety and comfort.

Members were reminded that following the committee’s decisions on the 2 September 2010 some members of the trade had made representations to members of the Licensing Regulatory Committee, and as a result members had asked for further extensive consultation on a number of matters. The access and egress arrangements had been included in that consultation process, which had concluded on 30 June 2011.

A breakdown of the result of the consultation was attached to the report. Members were advised that there was only a 13% response from the whole trade about this issue: 59% of the people responding disagreed with the above requirement which represented 7.8% of those consulted.

Members were reminded that as part of the consultation process, a trade fair had been organised, and vehicle suppliers had been invited to bring along vehicles that had been adapted to comply with this requirement as well as vehicles that did not comply.  Members of the trade, elected members, officers from Lancashire County Council transport section, and members of disability groups had been invited to attend the trade fair, and their feedback was requested

It was advised that those that had attended the trade fair had been asked to rate the vehicles from 1 to 5 on various aspects of access, egress, comfort, leg room etc., 1 being excellent, and 5 being impossible. A table of the results and some of the comments was attached to the report. It was noted that the results of the trade fair appeared to conclude that some vehicles are a lot more accessible and comfortable than others.

It was reported that the licensing manager had consulted with other local authorities, and with the transport department at Lancashire County Council who were responsible for school contracts etc. Responses were attached to the report.

The committee was informed of the Department for Transport’s Best Practice Guidance, which was detailed in full in the report.

Members were advised that the Minister of State for Transport had announced the way forward on accessibility for taxis and private hire vehicles. The department would be taking forward demonstration schemes in three local authority areas to research the needs of people with disabilities in order to produce guidance on the most appropriate provision. In the meantime, the department recognised that some local licensing authorities would want to make progress on enhancing accessible taxi provision.

It was advised that different accessibility considerations applied between taxis and PHVs. Taxis could be hired on the spot, in the street or at a rank, by the customer dealing directly with a driver. PHVs could only be booked through an operator. It was important that a disabled person should be able to hire a taxi on the spot with the minimum delay or inconvenience, and having accessible taxis available helped to make that possible. For PHVs, it may be more appropriate for a local authority to license any type of saloon car, noting that some PHV operators offer accessible vehicles in their fleet.

Members were also advised that if a proprietor wished to license a vehicle that did not meet the requirement, that vehicle could be considered by the committee, to determine whether an exception could be made on the individual merits of the application. Members were reminded that at the Licensing Regulatory Committee held on 21 July 2011, a request had been received from a proprietor to waive the requirement on access and egress, and members had approved the application. As a result of this the vehicle had now been included on an approved list so that any further applications submitted for a vehicle with the same specification would be granted by officers.

Officers recommended that the procedure as set out above be adopted for all future applications, and that vehicles be considered on their individual merit. It was considered that the outcome of the trade fair showed that some vehicles that did not have direct access may be more suitable than others.  Any such policy would be in line with the DFT guidance as it would not automatically rule out any particular type of vehicle.  It was advised that additional safety requirements could then be imposed if required, as was the case with the vehicle which had been approved in July.  Members could then satisfy themselves that all of the vehicles licensed by the council were suitable for purpose, comfortable, accessible and safe.

It was proposed by Councillor Johnson and seconded by Councillor Burns: -

“(1)      That the requirement that access and egress to all passenger seats should be unimpeded, as set out in the report, be maintained.

 (2)       That the committee may make exceptions for specific models of vehicle, made to the manufacturer’s specification, on an individual basis, with vehicles approved in this way added to an approved list of vehicles in order that any future requests to license an identical vehicle could be dealt with automatically.”

Upon being put to the vote, members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the chairman declared the proposition to be carried.

 Resolved:

(1)        That the requirement that access and egress to all passenger seats should be unimpeded, as set out in the report, be maintained.

(2)        That the committee may make exceptions for specific models of vehicle, made to the manufacturer’s specification, on an individual basis, with vehicles approved in this way added to an approved list of vehicles in order that any future requests to license an identical vehicle could be dealt with automatically.