Report Date:14th September 2016
Report Author: Alison Hughes / /Helen Jones
BLAENAU GWENT COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCILReport to / General Licensing Committee
Report Subject / Consideration of the Hackney Carriage Fare Tariff for Blaenau Gwent
Report Author / Alison Hughes/Helen Jones
Report date / 14th September 2016
Directorate / Environment and Regeneration
Executive Portfolio Holder / Cllr Rowberry – Licensing Committee
Date of meeting / 1st November 2016
Date signed off by
Monitoring Officer
Date signed off by
Section 151 Officer
Date signed off by Chair
Key words / Hackney carriage, fare tariff,
Report Information Summary
1. / Purpose of Report*1.1 / To consider reviewing the current hackney carriage fare tariff, following a request from some members of the taxi trade due to recent increases in licence fees and other costs.
2. / Scope of the Report*
2.1 / Following the notification of increases to our taxi licence fees, a small number of the Blaenau Gwent Hackney trade asked for an increase in the fares that they are allowed to charge. This report considers whether, in response to the number of requests received, it is appropriate to formally consult the taxi trade in relation to a change in fare tariff.
3. / Recommendation/s for Consideration*
3.1 / That Members agree that is not necessary to review the fare tariff and that no further action is required at this time, having regard to the limited response received to the recent informal consultation, local benchmarking and the likely effect of any increase on the public and taxi trade (Option 1).
Why this topic is a priority for the Council?*
Report author to identify links to the main corporate strategies.
Single Integrated Plan (SIP) / Corporate Improvement Plan (CIP) / Performance Management Improvement Framework (PMIF) / Operating Model / Transforming Blaenau Gwent (TBG Programme) / Other
(please state)
Regulatory
Reporting Pathway*
Report author to identify proposed reporting pathway.(To include dates where possible)
Directorate Management Team (DMT) / Corporate Management Team (CMT) / Audit / Democratic Services Committee / Scrutiny / Executive / Council / Other (please state)
Yes / General Licensing Committee
*Denotes mandatory section
Main Report
1. / Background and Context*1.1 / Hackney Carriages are equipped with a taximeter, which is calibrated to the fare tariff set by the licensing authority. The fare tariff is the maximum charge that can be made to customers who use licensed hackney carriages.
1.2 / In accordance with Section 65 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Council may fix the rates or fares for hackney carriages within its area.The current fare tariff came into force on 12th October 2007, a copy of which is attached at Appendix 1.
1.3 / Since 2007 there have been a number of licence fee increases - drivers licences have increased from £40 to £270 (as cost recovery was introduced) and vehicle fees have increased from £150 to £201, in addition to other costs of living, e.g. fuel increases, over that period. This has resulted in a small number of requests for a change to the local tariff.
1.4 / Under the Blaenau Gwent CBC constitution (June 2016), the power to fix rates or fares for hackney carriages and private hire vehicles rests with the Director of Environment & Regeneration subject to Scrutiny by General Licensing Committee.
2. / Options for Consideration
2.1 / Option 1 - That it is not necessary to review the fare tariff and that no further action is required at this time, having regard to the limited response received to the recent informal consultation, local benchmarking and the likely effect of any increase on the public and taxi trade.
2.2 / Option 2 – That it is necessary to proceed with a review of the fare tariff subject to formal consultation with the taxi trade.
3. / Performance Evidence and Information*
3.1 / Following the notification of increases to our taxi licence fees, a small number of the Blaenau Gwent Hackney trade asked for an increase in the fares that they are allowed to charge. As a result, a letter (Appendix 2) was sent to alllicensed hackney carriage proprietors, over 180 in total, informally consulting them on whether fares should be reviewed. In total, just 7 requests to increase fees were received (Appendix 3) with 3 requests not to increase fares (Appendix 4).
3.2 / Those requesting a fare increase make the following points:
(i)The licensing fees charged by Blaenau Gwent council have increased since 2007, with no comparable increase in the fares that the trade are able to charge to cover these costs.
(ii)Other costs such as petrol and insurance have also increased, along with changes in the minimum wage etc.
3.3 / Those requesting that fees remain as they are commented as follows:
(i)There are costs associated with recalibration of the meters used to display fares, and the company in Cardiff used by many drivers to do this has ceased trading
(ii)An increase in fares could cut customer numbers
(iii)Some drivers already undercut the agreed fare and would presumably continue to do so
3.4 / The specified fares are the maximum permitted, but drivers are able to charge a lower fee. Those charging lower fares would, however, still have to make arrangements and pay to have their meters calibrated to show the higher fare level. There would also be a loss of income as vehicles would have to be taken to Merthyr Tydfil or elsewhere to have this re-calibration carried out.
3.5 / Details of the fare tariffs for Caerphilly, Merthyr Tydfil, Monmouthand Torfaenare attached at Appendix 5, and none of these authorities are currently consulting on fare increases.The fares in Blaenau Gwent are neither the highest nor lowest but, should the fares rise to those suggested by some respondents, the fares would then become the highest in the region. Given that the taxi trade in Blaenau Gwent is, unlike other areas, significantly hackney trade based, this would have a significant impact on taxi users as more journeys are charged according to a meter and fewer fares are agreed in advance.
4. / Impact Assessment Against Proposals / Options*
4.1 / Sustainable Development Principles:
- Thinking for the long term – The matters outlined in this report show the financial implications for the council and the effect on the businesses affected by the changes.
- Taking an integrated approach – The recommendation outlined in the report has been formulated with the well-being goals in mind.
- Taking a preventative approach – The recommendation outlined in the report has been formulated in order to prevent problems relating to the effect of an increase in fare tariff.
- Collaborating – Not a consideration for this report.
- Involvement;-The matters outlined in the report are subject to relevant democratic scrutiny and support and the taxi trade has been involved.
- Equality impact assessment screening. –No adverse impact on protected characteristics asa result of the recommendation.
5. / Financial Implications*
5.1 / If it is agreed that this matter should not go out to formal consultation (Option 1), then there would be no financial impact on the authority or local residents.Hackney Carriage proprietors wishing to increase fares would not be able to do so, however local fares would remain competitive and this helps the taxi trade compete against other forms of transport.
5.2 / If it agreed that this should go to consultation (Option 2), the cost of advertising will be around £600. Depending on the queries raised and level of controversy, there is a potential significant impact in terms of staff time.
If a fare increase is approved following consultation, there are financial implications for:
(i)the taxi trade, as vehicle proprietors must pay for and arrange the necessary updates to their hackney carriage meter. All proprietors will be required to produce evidence to the licensing team before the new tariff takes effect.
(ii)this authority, as officers will need to deal with in excess of 180 vehicle proprietors and ensure that their meters have been re-calibrated
(iii)the public, who will be required to pay a higher charge for the use of local taxis.
6. / Risk Implications*
6.1 / The risks are mainly reputational, particularly if there is a split in the trade regarding the need for a fare increase, or if any fare increase is not accepted as necessary by the public.
7. / Staffing/Workforce Development Implications*
7.1 / The main staff implication is the extra work involved in any consultation, and implementation of the new tariff if a change is approved. There areno training implications.
8. / Conclusion*
8.1 / Sevenof the 180 hackney carriage proprietors in Blaenau Gwent have asked for an increase in the hackney carriage fares tariff, whilst 3 have asked for the fares to remain the same. The General Licensing Committee is being asked to agree that a full consultation on the taxi tariff is not currently appropriate, given the low number of Hackney Carriage Proprietors requesting an increase, local benchmarking, and the likely effect of any increase on the public and taxi trade.
*Denotes mandatory section
List of Appendices
- Current Blaenau Gwent Taxi Fares
- Letter to Tax Trade – 13th May 2016
- Letters Supporting a Change in Tariffs
- Letter Against a Change in Tariffs
- Regional Tariff Benchmarking
1