Agenda item

The Lead Licensing Officer presented the report to the Sub-Committee. He explained that the report invited the Members to consider whether or not a vehicle that cannot comply with the standard private hire vehicle conditions is suitable to be licensed as a private hire vehicle.

He informed them that the application is for a convertible Mini Cooper which was first registered on the 1st March 2018 and at the time of application, the vehicle was 3 years old.

He said that the standard conditions attached to the grant of a Private Hire Vehicle licence state “The vehicle must be fitted with a right-hand drive and shall have a minimum of four doors. At least three of these doors must be accessible for passengers to enter and exit the vehicle without the need to move, adjust, or climb over any seating”.

He stated that the vehicle is fitted with 2 doors and whilst the vehicle is a convertible model, in the event of an accident when the roof is not retracted any passengers in the rear would not have an accessible egress from the vehicle. Therefore, the vehicle is non-compliant with this requirement stipulated by the standard conditions.

He explained that the standard conditions attached to the grant of a Private Hire Vehicle licence state “A roof sign as prescribed by the Council shall be fitted to the vehicle at all time whilst hired or available for hire. The roof sign shall be fitted along the length of the vehicle’s roof, illumination of the roof sign is not permitted”.

He said that the vehicle is a convertible model and cannot be fitted with a roof sign, therefore, the vehicle is non-complaint with this section of the standard conditions.

The Sub-Committee were shown a video to enable them to virtually inspect the vehicle.

The applicant addressed the Sub-Committee and said that in light of the Covid-19 pandemic they were seeking a new way to attract business alongside their longstanding small coach / mini-bus tours of Stonehenge.

They said that the vehicle would be used for sightseeing tours of the City and that customers would have to book and pay in advance for the tours.

They stated that when in use the vehicle would be travelling at a low speed for the majority of the time.

The applicant said that they were willing to seek other solutions regarding the need for signage on the 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 written and oral representations. Members also had the benefit of a ‘virtual’ inspection of the vehicle. 

The applicant outlined the nature of its business and stated it has an operators’ licence to run larger buses and mini-bus tours and have done so without incident or accident. They now wish to run smaller bespoke tours and use the iconic Mini to do so as others throughout the UK already do. It was accepted, however, that the vehicle does not meet the requirements of the Council’s Standard Conditions. In terms of safety it was stated that whilst the vehicle is two door the vehicle would not be used for multiple pick up and drop off but rather as a convertible, low speed tour option. Accordingly, the applicant believed that emergency exit would not be an issue.

In determining the matter Members reminded themselves that they must be satisfied that the vehicle is suitable in type, size and design for use as a private hire vehicle and, furthermore, safe and comfortable.

Members approached this application on its merits and noted in terms of their Policy covering colour, luggage, plates, roof signs and for vehicles to have 4 doors that they may depart from Policy with good reason. Nevertheless, Members were clear in that their primary duty is the protection of the public and that the Policy is in place to serve that very purpose.

Having had the benefit of a ‘virtual’ inspection Members were disappointed to note there was no demonstration of how rear seated passengers would get in and out of the vehicle. They noted, however, that the intended exit route for rear seated passengers in an emergency must be over collapsed front seats through the front doors or, in extreme circumstances, through the rear roof space over the side or rear of the vehicle.

Accordingly, Members found that without rear doors there is a risk that the rear seated passenger exit routes could be blocked in the event of a loss of control and or collision with other vehicles, structures or road furniture whatever the speed on impact.

Moreover, Members found there was a risk to the safety of rear seated passengers as they may not be able to exit through the side or rear roof for any number of personal or incident related reasons. In all the circumstances, therefore, and noting the vehicle will not be used as a ‘jobbing’ Private Hire Vehicle, Members were  not against the convertible aspect of the application but rather found no good reason to depart from the Policy requirement for a licenced vehicle to have 4 doors.

Therefore, Members do not find the vehicle suitable in type, size and design to be licensed as a Private Hire Vehicle. The application is therefore refused.