Agenda item

GS was in attendance accompanied by his wife.

Councillor Afzal Shah accompanied them.

The Senior Licencing Officer introduced the report and summarised it for everyone. He confirmed that the Council had decided that in 2018 vehicles of this type would no longer licenced due to the constrained internal dimensions of the vehicle. It is made clear on the BCC website that vehicles of this particular make and model will not be licensed.

GS and his wife put their case and answered questions highlighting the following:

• They did not know that the Council would not license the vehicle
• They bought it on finance and are now so financially stretched they cannot afford to buy food for their children
• She works part time for NHS 111 but at the moment he is the only financial provider for the family at the moment
• They bought the vehicle in December (2020) but did not know that it did not comply with the Council’s Policy on licensing private hire vehicles; they confirmed that they had not checked on the Council website prior to purchasing the vehicle

The Senior Licensing Officer explained that whilst the vehicle fails the particular test concerning the distance between the rear of the front seat and the backrest of the rear seat by 15mm, the overall internal dimensions of the vehicle are not considered large enough to make it comfortable for 4 adults.

Councillor Shah explained that although GS lives in the Lawrence Hill Ward, neither of the Councillors for Ward were available, so he had agreed to speak on their behalf for GS. He has seen the vehicle and is aware that BCC has previously licensed this model. He asked that the Committee uses its discretion. He acknowledged that GS had made a mistake and had not checked the Policy on the website. He noted that English is second language for GS and asked that the Committee be mindful of the current situation. He is not aware of any problems with this vehicle.

In response to a question, the Senior Licensing Officer advised that whilst the website does not provide a list of the vehicles which can be licensed, It does however list this vehicle as one that will not be licensed.

GS, his wife, Cllr Shah and the Senior Licensing Officer left the room whilst the Committee made its decision.

Decision

The Committee considered very carefully all of the written, video and verbal evidence that it had received.

Following a debate the Committee decided that a private hire vehicle licence be granted in respect of vehicle registration RA18 UOV in accordance with section 48 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

Reasons for Decision

The Committee noted that the vehicle had undergone an inspection at Fleet Services on 23 December 2020 and although it passed the mechanical and cosmetic check, it had failed on the measurements of the rear seats. The Council’s policy on Private Hire Vehicle Specification with covers internal dimensions states:

7. All vehicles should have a minimum of 4 doors, be right hand drive and must be so constructed so that the doors open sufficiently wide as to allow easy access and egress from the vehicle. No discomfort or inconvenience should be caused to passengers. In order to ensure this the vehicle should comply with the following dimensions:…

… b. The measurement between the rear of the front seats and the backrest of the rear seat should be a minimum of 750mm (approximately 30 inches). ….”

The measurement between the rear of the front seat and the backrest of the rear seat in GS’s vehicle was 735mm.  Although the Committee noted that this was a very small deviation, the policy contains “minimum” requirements and therefore the vehicle did not comply with Council policy.  It was also noted that the Council had previously licensed the Toyota Auris, but in 2018 officers had inspected the vehicle and confirmed the measurements did not meet the Council’s Private Hire Vehicle Policy in that the vehicle was too small to comfortably accommodate four passengers due to the internal dimensions. It was therefore decided that the Toyota Auris was no longer suitable to be licensed for private hire work, which was published on the Council’s website.

This was the first occasion on which an application had been made to licence this particular vehicle.  GS and his wife had purchased it on finance in December 2020 but prior to doing so, had not checked whether it was suitable to be licensed for private hire work and had therefore made a mistake.  GS who was accompanied by his wife and a Ward Member pleaded exceptional hardship, that they were tied in with finance on the vehicle and could not afford to purchase another one.  The Committee had a great deal of sympathy for the Applicant and his family, but could not take personal circumstances into account in deciding whether or not to allow a departure from Council policy.  However, it was acknowledged that we are currently living in exceptional times with the economy and businesses, including the taxi trade being on their knees.  In the light of the current COVID situation and the fact that the failure to comply with policy was more of an issue of comfort, rather than safety, the Committee decided that there were compelling reasons to justify a departure from Council policy on this occasion and in respect of this particular application only, but this was no way intended to set a precedent that any future applications in respect of the Toyota Auris would be approved.  

Everyone returned to the room to hear the decision announced.

Resolved - that a private hire vehicle licence be granted in respect of vehicle registration RA18 UOV in accordance with section 48 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.