CRAWLEY LICENSED CAB DRIVERS ASSOCIATION
Local cab associations can be a grind for a variety of reasons mostly to do with the variety of individual axes! However a few bright sparks can hone a committee into an effective tool to battle for drivers. In Crawley we formed our current association:- The Crawley Licensed Cab Drivers, in 2005 in response to an influx of cabs/drivers licensed by Mole Valley D.C. We accept both PHV and Hackney members as, although there is also a Hackney Association in town, we felt that there was more common ground than reasons to remain separate. In our first year we attracted nearly 130 members who were all very cross about Mole Valley licensing within our borders!
We received a lot of help and information from the NPHA and have written several times to Mole Valley with the latest reproduced here................ The Department for Transport was our next destination and we sent them this letter following "the silent treatment" from MV ...................We and our local MP Laura Moffatt, await their response with anticipation. Crawley Borough Council have also tried to dissuade MVDC from their misguided actions but " it isn't the done thing for one council to take another to court " . They could of course take an operator to court for using cars/drivers not licensed by Crawley as in the case of Murtagh and Carter v Bromsgrove DC which was decided in 1999 in the High Court, but they have not.......yet!
The other major issue which has exercised our minds has been our desire to change our vinyl door stickers into magnetic ones so that our cars are not targeted for break-ins and drivers can have a family/social life without being pestered, often rudely. You know the scenario, " Get on to your office mate and find out where my cab is / book me a cab / change the time etc etc ." Driver replies " I'm sorry, I'm not on duty / going shopping / to the cinema / visiting my sick Mother." Then you get the understanding reply " I don't give a XXXX, just get on to your control and do as I say." Well I can tell you Crawley BC also didn't give a XXXX for our plea for a change. Their "Policy Forum" wouldn't even forward it to the Executive for a decision. They obviously value their vinyl over drivers privacy and security. Shame they can't show the same resolve in tackling Mole Valley, but we've not given up yet!
Like many readers, we've had our share of abuse / runners / threats and violence which has been growing worse over the last few years. Back in November a Hackney driver was stabbed, on a Sunday afternoon! Luckily it wasn't too serious and the lowlifes were caught, but it was the camel's straw for CLCDA. We wrote to the council and police asking for funding support for In -car CCTV. Our local paper "The Crawley News" , with whom we have a good relationship asked for comments on the attack which we were happy to provide even though expletives were deleted! This was picked up by BBC Southern Counties radio who wanted to do a telephone interview......live.....at 0800..... two days after Christmas!!!! Nerves? Me? Thanks to a cordless phone. I was sat in bed with my Wife and a cup of coffee being questioned about the dangers of a cabbies life and the virtues of CCTV. Crawley Council were represented by the Manager responsible for licensing, Tony Baldock. He was very positive and live on air, committed the Council to investigate the availability of funds. All 15 listeners were riveted by our lively debate at such an early hour and sank back into their pillows to retreat into their less surreal dreamworlds! BBC South TV were our next suitors. Their Editor must have been one of the 15 and was so impressed that my Chairman, Zainool Ebrahim and I were engaged to be interviewed on camera ( but at least it wasn't live). The consumation of our betrothal to BBC TV was a short feature shown on South Today!
After a few weeks we heard from Crawley Council that funds were available under the crime and disorder reduction partnership, to assist CCTV installations to the tune of £250 per car. There are rules to follow such as working late/nights especially Fri/Sat but that's only fair. The monies are not unlimited though and are targeted 20% Hackney and 10 % PHV.
The CLCDA has worked with Crawley Council for the benefit of ALL cab drivers in Crawley and will continue to do so. We don't always agree with our Council but we don't demonise them either. All of this shows that with willing individuals, local associations can work. Please take note
Mr Flanagan.
John Fraser
Secretary CLCDA
Letter 1
CRAWLEY LICENSED CAB DRIVERS ASSOCIATION
Dear Mr. Mepham,
LICENSING BY MOLE VALLEY DC OF CRAWLEY BASED PRIVATE HIRE OPERATORS,THEIR DRIVERS AND CARS
I wrote to you on the 8th March 2007 asking that you carry out one of two actions. Either explain to us how your actions are legal, or cease to issue licenses outside your administrative area. You have apparently done neither.
When our Chairman wrote to Mr Pleasance from your Licensing Section in August 2006, he responded with a justification drawn from Mr James Button's respected book "TAXIS - Licensing Law and Practice".
In our letter of 11th October 2006 we pointed out the incorrect interpretation your Officer had placed on the passage quoted from Mr. Button's book. We also listed three landmark High Court cases which established the precedent that Operators Licenses used outside their issuers administrative area are of no legal standing as a defence to using cars/drivers from that area, within the Operators home borough.
Taking all the above facts together with your lack of response, I must now conclude that you realise your actions are malfeasant.
I would advise you that we will now be expanding our efforts in every sphere to re-establish local democratic control of Private Hire Operators, cars and drivers in Crawley and the surrounding areas.
Yours sincerely
John B Fraser
Secretary CLCDA
cc Mr M. Coughlin Chief Executive CBC
Mrs. L. Moffatt MP
letter 2
18/4/07
Department for Transport
Great Minster House
Dear Sirs,
LICENSING OF PRIVATE HIRE OPERATORS, DRIVERS AND CARS
I would be most grateful if you could clarify a question on the interpretation of the 1976 Local Govt ( Miscellaneous Provisions ) Act. This has come about because Mole Valley DC has Licensed PH operators, cars and drivers in Crawley and other areas eg Reigate & Banstead.
Our understanding of the law is as stated in a Dept of Transport letter dated 25th June 1992, which was addressed to the District Secretary of Bromsgrove District Council.
Paragraph 3 states:-
"In our view applying section 80(2) to sections 46(1)(d) and(e) has the effect that an
operator requires a license from the area in which he intends to operate and may
operate only in that area vehicles and drivers licensed by the same district. This has
the practical effect that an operator licensed in area A may only use vehicles and
drivers licensed in area A but these vehicles and drivers will by virtue of the
section 75(2) exemption be able to go anywhere in the course of a hiring."
This letter was quoted by Lord Justice Kennedy in the case of Dittah and Choudhry v Birmingham City Council ] , in his judgement he states:-
"That in my judgement is an accurate statement of the law whatever may have
been said elsewhere in the past."
My first query is simple, is the law as stated above or has there been a change in interpretation of the Act? Secondly , if the law is as above what can be done about Mole Valley DC issuing licenses outside their own administrative area?
Thank you for your help in this matter.
Yours Faithfully
John B Fraser , Secretary CLCDA
|