Agenda item

The applicant confirmed that he understood the procedure to be followed for the hearing.

The Senior Public Protection Officer presented the report. The issue was whether a vehicle over five years was suitable to be licensed as a private hire vehicle. The vehicle in question was previously licensed with the Authority until 17^th May 2018. On that date the applicant replaced the vehicle (a Skoda Superb) with a newer vehicle registered in 2018. The applicant now wished to re-licence the Skoda Superb, which was at the time of this application 6 years and 5 months old, as a private hire vehicle. The Council’s current policy provides “that all vehicles will normally be less than five years old when first licensed” and that applications for a licence for vehicles older than this will be referred to the Licensing Sub-Committee. The vehicle was not available for inspection because of the absence of parking space on account of the Christmas Market.

The applicant stated his case. He explained that the when originally licensed in February 2014 the vehicle was less than 2 years old. The vehicle had been damaged in an accident which had been entirely the fault of the other driver, who had been uninsured. His insurance company had provided a replacement vehicle. While his own vehicle was being repaired, he had transferred the licence plate to another vehicle. He now wished to re-license Skoda Superb and was surprised that its age should be an issue, since it was under five years old when first licensed. He suggested there was an ambiguity in the Council’s policy. Surely this was not the first time something like this had happened. He felt a sense of grievance at the unfairness of the situation. He had incurred significant expense. Because the other driver had not been insured, he had lost the excess on his insurance policy, lost his no claims bonus, had to make a claim on his own policy, and had lost three weeks earnings. As far as he was aware the other driver was not being prosecuted. The applicant wondered what he should have done. If he had kept the licence plate on the Skoda Superb, that would have been an additional cost for him. If he had insisted that his insurance company had provided a replacement vehicle, they would have incurred considerable cost, but this situation would not have avoided. An appointment for transferring the plate from the Skoda had been made with the claims management company, who had informed him that he to come to collect his vehicle. The applicant had arranged to meet the driver of his vehicle in advance, so that he could he could inspect it vehicle and check that everything was in order. The driver had turned up late, so that the applicant had to conduct an inspection of the vehicle while being under great pressure to transfer the licence plate. It had not occurred to him that if transferred the licence plate that his application to re-licence the Skoda Superb would be treated as a new application. At the time he was not sure if he was going to have the vehicle repaired, because he had not heard from his insurance company about how badly damaged it was. Eventually he decided to buy the vehicle back from the insurance company and have it repaired at his own expense. The vehicle had a current MoT and was fully roadworthy. In correspondence with Licensing he had offered to have the vehicle subjected to any tests that were thought appropriate.

[Understand Breathe Campaign, believe it’s called. New vehicle less than t vehicles. 140g/km, which I understand to be EU5. Possibly E5 emitting vehicle. EU6 106g/km. No intended use after 2020. Road fund licence payable accorging to annual guidelines. low emissions £30.

In response to questions from Members the applicant stated:

·  The vehicle had been returned to him in August. He had delayed his application until September to enjoy the current taxation.

·  He had now had two vehicles

After an adjournment the Sub-Committee RESOLVED that the applicant’s vehicle was suitable to be licensed as a private hire vehicle.

Decision and reasons

Members have had to determine an application for a Private Hire Vehicle Licence. In doing so they took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, the Council’s Policy and the applicant’s oral representations.

The applicant accepted the vehicle fell outside the council’s policy. He stated that he had been involved in a no fault accident and it had taken a while to repair the vehicle. Now that the vehicle has been repaired he wanted to re-licence it. He feels let down by the insurance process which has cost him a considerable sum in financial terms and the delay.

Due to parking constraints Members did not have the opportunity to inspect the vehicle. Members nevertheless reminded themselves of the legal framework and the Council’s Private Hire Vehicle Licence general conditions. These state Members must be satisfied that a vehicle is suitable in type, size and design for use as a private hire vehicle and furthermore is safe, comfortable and less than 5 years old at the date of first licensing.

Members noted the vehicle was licensed by the council until 17 May 2018 and after the accident only became roadworthy in late August. In the circumstances Members consider that with such a short passage of time since the licence expired, the vehicle continues to be suitable in type, size and design. Accordingly authority is delegated to the licensing officer to issue the license subject to all necessary certification being provided.