What do we really want?

Mark Bursa outlines Professional Driver’s response to the recent Government consultation on the taxi and private hire sector

THE DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT’S CONSULTATION INTO best practice within the taxi and private hire sector closed at the end of June. We’ve listened to sensible voices within the industry, and we wanted our response to reflect those views.

The consultation appeared to be thorough, well thought-out and pressing all the right buttons. So a considered and comprehensive response was certainly merited.

This is an extremely fragmented industry, containing a number of different types of operators, which often find themselves in competition with each other. This includes: u Hackney Carriage taxis (“black cabs” in London; less well defined elsewhere) u Private hire vehicles (“minicabs”) u Ride-hailing operators and drivers (eg Uber, Bolt etc) u Executive chauffeurs In addition, the industry is subject to local, not national regulation. Hence the standards applicable to taxis in London are very different to those applied elsewhere.

LONDON BLACK CABS

It is worth noting that a “hackney taxi” in London is very different to most other towns and cities, where the vehicle may be a regular saloon car.

The London black taxi lobby is extremely vociferous via its trade body, the LTDA, and defensive of its long-standing position. However, we believe times have changed and many of the black taxi objections to change are now spurious.

As time progresses, it is more difficult to find justification for the special status of the black cabs (mainly as an “iconic” tourist attraction). Despite the arrival of new hybrid taxis, many of the cabs on the roads are still highly polluting diesels that could be up to 15 years old. Why do these vehicles receive special treatment over cleaner hybrid PHVs?

THE NEED FOR NATIONAL STANDARDS

With more than 300 separate licensing authorities across the UK, there is a lack of consistency in licensing standards applying to vehicles, drivers and operators. The cost of licensing varies greatly among councils.

The “local” nature of licensing is at the root of many problems within the sector, as there is virtually no consistency in their approach.

We feel the consultation is an opportunity to confront this issue and look toward establishing true national standards for the industry. Not minimum standards to be applied locally at the whims of local council licensing officers, but national standards along the lines of the way Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) or Public Service Vehicle (PSV) drivers and vehicles are governed – with a single set of national standards.

We note that there have been previous attempts to redefine the sector, such as the work by the Law Commission in 2010-11, which attempted to draw clearer definitions but was ultimately not acted upon. There still remains no clear definition between a “taxi” and a “private hire vehicle”. Taxis can be hailed on the street or via a rank, but the advent of app-based e-hailing has added complexity to this situation.

It is our view that e-hailing is not the same as physically hailing a taxi. PHVs accessible via app-based systems cannot use taxi ranks. The technology that powers e-hailing apps is now commonplace. Most private hire and taxi operators now have access to such systems. Legislation must not suppress technological progress.

EMPLOYMENT MODELS

A number of high-profile court cases involving Uber has ruled that Uber’s drivers are neither self-employed, nor employees. Rather, they are “workers” and thus entitled to certain benefits such as sick pay, holiday pay and pensions.

However, these rulings have not established any legal precedent across the whole industry, and we face a situation where each ruling only applies to the operator in question.

Other operators (eg Veezu) are adamant that their drivers are self-employed “partners”, responsible for sourcing their own cars, insurance etc, while others (for example Green Tomato Cars) are happy to employ drivers on PAYE and provide them with a company-owned vehicle to drive.

Meanwhile, some licensing authorities (including TfL) allow drivers to work for multiple operators (especially those working for ride-hailing apps who might take jobs from Uber, Ola, Bolt and Free Now during the working day). Other cities such as Manchester only allow drivers to work for one operator, whether it be a traditional private hire or taxi fleet or a ride-hailer.

This is clearly anomalous and requires addressing. The status of the ride-hailing apps is likely to change. Uber is already distributing large numbers of jobs directly to local operators via its Local Cab service. Under this regime, Uber effectively acts as a booking platform rather than an operator.

The customer uses the Uber app to connect, via software to a “Local Cab” operator which then fulfils the job using its own drivers and cars, without directly having any contact with Uber. Uber merely takes a cut of the fare (as, say, hotels.com takes a cut of a booking made via its site).

National standards need to be flexible enough to recognise these changes in the operating landscape and not be used as a restraint on drivers getting work. Duplication of fleets of cars working for, say, Uber and Bolt in a city such as Manchester leads to more cars running empty when not carrying passengers, thus creating more congestion and more pollution.

TAXI VS PRIVATE HIRE

A private hire vehicle is exactly that – a vehicle that has been hired, privately, like a rental car, but with a driver. There is no requirement for a PHV to carry signage, door stickers or other distinguishing marks unless the operator wants to do so.

A publicly hired taxi, on the other hand, needs to be clearly recognised. The simplest way to differentiate a taxi (hackney carriage) from a PHV is simply via the roof sign. We would propose that a “taxi” must display a taxi roof sign, either built in to the design (as per London black cabs) or attached to the roof as on regular cars. to be illuminated when the vehicle is available for hire.

A PHV should not be equipped with a roof sign. There is no need for the public to be aware that the vehicle is available for hire, as the only way a prebooked taxi can be hired is via advance booking. Likewise, no mandatory colouring or markings should be forced upon operators of pre-booked taxis. It is up to the operator as to how much or how little signwriting is applied to the vehicle.

Vehicles operated under joint Hackney/PHV licenses, as is common in many towns and cities, should display a roof sign as they are capable of being used on rank, or “plying for hire”.

The car’s licensing information can be displayed on a form of “tax disc” on the front or rear windscreen, which would allow inspections and spot-checks to be made.

EXECUTIVE CHAUFFEUR VEHICLES

Within the private hire sector, there is a significant sub-sector that does not appear to have been given enough attention. The Executive Chauffeur sector offers a more up-market service, using luxury cars (Mercedes, BMW, Audi and so on) but under Private Hire rules – pre-booked only. These operators cater largely for a business client base, focusing on corporate account customers, as well as tourist and celebrity customers.

The Executive Chauffeur operators offer a discreet service, generally with un-marked and unplated vehicles. Signage, taxi lights or taxi plates are unwelcome. In London, a small windscreenmounted disc suffices to distinguish these vehicles; there is no need to carry a PHV plate. This standard should apply nationally for this class of vehicle.

LICENSING AND PLATING

The upshot of the Deregulation Act has been to allow PHVs registered in one licensing authority to operate in other territories. This has allowed drivers and operators to take advantage of councils such as Wolverhampton, which offer cheaper, faster licensing services.

Many drivers choose Wolverhampton because their local town’s system is so slow – delays of up to 12 months in getting a license have been reported. Faced with these challenges, many drivers walk away from the sector – hence contributing to current driver shortages. If we are to move toward a national system, with national pricing, these authorities will lose their price advantage, but not their efficiency advantage. Therefore it is likely that councils such as Wolverhampton would continue to license a disproportionate number of cars and drivers.

Is this a problem? Not if national standards are applied. If the structures are in place across all authorities, the standard should be the same. This should do away with the need for local licence plates. In fact the use of ANPR systems to recognise if a taxi or PHV is entering a limited area (eg a Clean Air Zone, or a Bus Lane) should be sufficient in order to recognize the vehicle. Moving forward, geofencing systems are already available to perform a similar task.

DRIVER TRAINING, KNOWLEDGE TESTS AND LANGUAGE TESTS

Should drivers be subject to stricter training requirements than regular motorists? While this may be desirable, it would be extremely impractical and cumbersome to implement. In reality, it should be left to the market to implement schemes as part of voluntary customer service programmes - we are already seeing some of the more progressive firms establishing driver academies and in-house training programmes.

The requirement for knowledge tests diminishes as sat-nav systems improve. Most vehicles now come with satnav systems, and app-based systems such as Waze are common. In addition, many appbased services offer directions to the driver.

By their nature, topographical tests are local.

How they could be enforced under a national system of licensing would require a framework for local authorities, perhaps as part of ongoing driver checks.

Written English tests are often introduced into the licensing process. This is wrong. The job of a private hire or taxi driver does not require command of written English, just basic spoken English and communications skills. This could be part of a national standard.

POINTS-BASED ENFORCEMENT

Points-based systems that allow minor breaches of the rules to be recorded and held on a driver’s record are only of use when they are fairly and equitably applied.

Again, a proper national standard would allow the acceptable “offences” to be defined and set. At present, it is up to local authorities, and we have reported on instances where totally unreasonable “offences” have been used against drivers (for example, the police being called to a residential address following a neighbour’s complaint but no charges being pressed). Offences that might result in “points” should be defined nationally and not left to the whims of local authority licensing officials.

VEHICLE STANDARDS

The lack of national standards means that vehicles registered under Transport for London’s area have to meet different criteria than other local authorities.

TfL has since 2020 only licensed zero-emissions capable vehicles (EVs, Plug-in hybrids), whereas all other councils have stuck to DfT/DoE guidelines of Euro 4 petrol/Euro 6 diesel standards.

TfL’s move has caused problems for operators and drivers due to a lack of suitable electric vehicles, especially larger 7-seaters. While the policy is intended to clean up London’s air, the effect is the opposite, as operators and drivers are hanging on to older vehicles as they cannot find a suitable replacement.

Vehicle standards must not penalise poorer drivers and must work within the framework of available vehicles. There are a number of reasons for vehicle shortages, and electric vehicle charging infrastructure is currently not up to the task.

Operators genuinely want to use cleaner vehicles (indeed, their clients increasingly demand this) and vehicle policies should be applied accordingly. It would be possible to draw up a list of acceptable vehicle standards for saloon, estate, MPV, SUV etc. Professional Driver Magazine evaluates all vehicles for the sector through thorough testing and we would be happy to help in this regard.

A national standard would obviate the need for local authorities to enforce cumbersome and costly rules, such as insisting cars are repainted to a specific colour, or the removal of tinted windows.

TINTED WINDOWS

This is one of the most contentious issues of licensing. We have reported countless instances of council jobsworths refusing to licence a car because the factory-fitted tints were “too dark” for them to peer into the back, or other spurious reasons.

Our view on tinted windows is that factoryfitted standards should be unchallengeable. It is impossible to replace these windows if that is what the car was supplied with.

It’s hard to see what the problem is with factoryfitted tints. Council arguments that inspectors cannot see into the back of the car are fatuous. The inspection is taking place when the car is stopped: ask the driver or rear seat occupant to open the window.

Aftermarket tints are a different story – and again, there are circumstances (eg executive limousines carrying celebrities etc) where darker tints are desirable. Recognition of the difference between executive chauffeur cars and regular PHVs should be part of the overarching standards, and would allow some leeway where appropriate.

IN-CAR CCTV

Another contentious issue, where there are strong benefits regarding driver and passenger safety, and identifying bad behaviour on either part.

Against this must be balanced the passenger’s right to privacy, especially in the executive chauffeuring sector, where discretion and confidentiality are often part of the chauffeur’s brief.

While we favour the use of CCTV devices (and indeed dashcams given the preponderance of ‘cash for crash’ scams), we believe there must be a framework for exemptions, again linked to the distinction between PHV and executive chauffeur vehicles and drivers.

CAR REPAINTS/WRAPS

Councils should not be empowered to force extra

costs on PHV drivers that damage the value of their vehicles. It’s acceptable within the national standards to have some allowable local definition for taxis (eg coloured panels on doors or bonnet, which can be applied as vinyls), but these should not be onerous and expensive. They should not be necessary for PHVs at all.

USE OF BUS LANES

All Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles are carrying members of the public and removing cars from the congested urban streets. Regardless of how they are booked or hailed, they are part of the public transport system in towns.

It makes no sense to deny access to bus lanes for some of the vehicles. The argument that Hackney Carriages need to use the bus lanes in order to pick up and drop off passengers applies equally to PHVs – a pre-booked customer could ask to be picked up or dropped off on a street where there is a bus lane.

Allowing all taxis and PHVs to use bus lanes also eliminates inconsistency around the country. Some councils allow PHVs to use bus lanes; others do not. There is no evidence to suggest that allowing PHVs to use bus lanes would slow bus traffic. In fact, the overall effect on traffic flow is likely to be positive through taking PHVs out of the regular traffic lanes.

In many cities and towns, executive chauffeur cars are denied access to bus lanes, as they are considered PHVs. It is at the very least incongruous that vehicles providing a premium service are given fewer road privileges than the most basic form of rank-hailed taxi. As most bus lanes are monitored via number-plate recognition systems, the lack of license plates should pose no problems with regard to bus lane use.

DISABILITY ACCESSIBLE VEHICLES

We support the mandatory provision of accessible vehicles in all areas, though it is worth noting that “accessible” vehicles are not necessarily “wheelchair accessible” vehicles (WAVs).

While there is a clear need for the latter, there are types of disability where carriage is better performed by regular cars. Poorly sighted passengers, for example, may find it much easier to get into the back of a regular saloon car than have to clamber into a large, van-based WAV.

Provision of disability accessible vehicles should be part of a wider provision of public

transport, including app-based “dial a ride” services, specialist hospital and education transport, accessible buses and trams, and so on. WAVs are not cheap, and some form of grant funding would be desirable.

VEHICLE CONDITION CHECKS

There are some benefits to this, in terms of basic safety checks (tyre wear, fluid levels, working lights, basic cleanliness of vehicle) but drivers should not be expected to be able to recognise

deeper problems. Current 6-monthly vehicle testing regimes should be sufficient to spot safetycritical issues such as brake or steering wear, and should be rigorous enough to spot issues that are likely to occur going forward.

EURO NCAP RESULTS

Few, if any, cars on sale these days are unsafe. Crash survivability in a vehicle built in the second or third decade of the 21st century is extremely good.

The Euro NCAP testing regime gives a relative framework of crashworthiness between cars, using very specific impact tests. For taxi operations, especially in urban areas, these tests may not have much relevance.

It would certainly not be right to use Euro NCAP results in isolation in order to disqualify certain vehicles from the licensing process. If a car’s performance was so poor as to be unsafe, it would fail the overall homologation process that rules it fit to be sold.

Summary

The taxi and private hire sector requires true national standards, not just national minima.

These should apply to vehicles, drivers and operators in all towns. There is a case for special regulations relating to London black cabs, but in time this becomes increasingly difficult to justify. The black cab model needs some degree of reform.

The sector should be centrally regulated as per PSV and HGV sectors, with national licensing standards, uniform licence costs and far fewer local regulations.

There are certain areas where local authorities should have input (eg., topographical tests or some limited vehicle requirements) but these should not be onerous in terms of cost and effort for the driver.

The process of getting licensed should be quick and relatively easy (without compromising safety). Drivers should be free to get licensed anywhere that offers the service.

Executive Chauffeur cars need to be recognised as a separate sub-set of PHVs with their own requirements resulting from the discreet service they offer.

National standards obviate local meddling in areas such as window tints, which cause a disproportionate amount of trouble.

Any new regulations must take into account the dynamic nature of the business and the ongoing changes in operation, including the advent and development of ride-hailing operations. It is worth nothing that these did not exist 10 years ago, when the Law Commission investigated the sector.