Licensing Committee - Tuesday 21 November 2023, 6:30pm - Feedback Tab - Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Webcasting
Agenda
Slides
Transcript
Map
Resources
Forums
Speakers
Feedback
Votes
Speaking:
Agenda item :
Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
Slide 1
Agenda item :
1 Chair's Introduction
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
2 Apologies for Absence
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
3 Declarations of Interest
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
4 Notification of Visiting Members wishing to speak (in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 18):
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
5 Minutes of the Previous Meeting dated 12 September 2023
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
6 Reports of Head of Housing, Health and Environment
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
6 a) Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy Review 2023-2028
Agenda item :
6 b) Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing: Licence Fees and Charges 2024/2025
Agenda item :
7 Licensing Fees and Charges 2024/2025
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
8 Pavement Licensing - review of policy and setting of fees
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
9 Urgent Business
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
10 Date of Next Meeting
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
1 Chair's Introduction
good evening and welcome to this meeting of the Licensing Committee on Tuesday, the 21 of November 2023 I am Councillor Atkins, Chair of this Committee, before we get on to the agenda items, please give your full attention to the following announcements from o'clock this morning.
thank you, Chair and good evening everybody in the event of the fire alarm ringing continuously, you must immediately evacuate the building at walking pace officers will escort you via the most direct available route, and no one is to use the lift we will make our way to the fire assembly point which is by the entrance to the Town Hall Yard car park and months away and once outside a check will be made to ensure everyone has safely left, no one has to re-enter the building until advised that it is safe to do so.
this is a public meeting and proceedings are being webcast live online, a recording will also be available for playback on the Council's website shortly afterwards.
can I remind everyone to use the microphones when speaking the red light indicates that the microphone is on and any comments that are not recorded for the webcast will not be included in the minutes of the meeting.
you should not be aware that any third party is able to record or film council meetings unless exempt or confidential information is being considered. The Council will not accept liability for any third party recordings. It is very important that the outcomes of the meeting are clear. At the end of each substantive item, the Chair will ask whether the matter is agreed in the absence of a clear majority, or if the Chair decides a full vote is desirable. A vote will be taken by a show of hands. Members should raise their hands to indicate their vote and keep their hands up until the count has been announced. Members requesting a recorded vote must do so before the vote is taken.
members of the public are registered to speak at the meeting, will be asked to come to the microphone at the appropriate time they will have three minutes to address the Committee after which they may return to their original seat, thank you Chair.
thank you for the benefit of the recording we are going to take a roll call.
thank you, Chair, expected Members here this evening, Councillor Fitzsimons.
present.
Councillor Hayward present.
Councillor Hill present Councillor Johnson present, Councillor Lidstone present Councillor O'Hara.
present Councillor Roberts present Councillor Sherratt, present Councillor White present, Councillor Wakeman, present and Councillor Warmington is not here at the moment, just for the benefit of the record of clucks Louisville to lose here 0 dear you, I can't say I thought I'd put all the W's over there.
I didn't see you come in there, sorry.
expected officers here this evening, Sharon Bamburgh.
just use the other one.
thank you present for sharing to Georgia.
present Helen Ward, present and we have Ellen Neville Cabinet Member for Environmental Services with this this evening Chair, thank you.
thank you.
do we have any apologies for absence?
yes, Chair, we have apologies from Councillors Alan Pope and Whetsted this evening.
2 Apologies for Absence
3 Declarations of Interest
agenda item 3 is declarations of interest members of the Committee should declare at this point if they have any declarations of interest on any agenda item this evening, does the Member have any decoration to make?
4 Notification of Visiting Members wishing to speak (in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 18):
Q, I see none agenda item for notifications of any person who has registered to speak, Mrs. Morgan, do we have any members of the public or visiting Members wishing to speak yesterday we have missed Tony Colin and Mr Clayton Barry registered, to speak this evening both on agenda item 6 A
5 Minutes of the Previous Meeting dated 12 September 2023
thank you agenda item 5 is minutes of the previous meeting and either dated the 12th of September 2023 Members are asked to confirm that the minutes of the previous meeting are a true record of the proceedings.
I remind all Members that any matches for discussion is their accuracy.
do Members have any other comments?
thank you, I see known, the motion is to agree the minutes.
we agreed.
thank you, the motion is carried.
6 Reports of Head of Housing, Health and Environment
agenda 6 is reports.
6 a) Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy Review 2023-2028
of Head of Housing is a report of Head of Housing, Health and Environment, and 6 Ayes, a hackney carriage and private hire licensing policy, new 2023 to 2028.
this report stars on page 11 of the agenda.
Mr Georgiou, please present your report.
thank you Chair.
it's assumed that members have read the report and the consultation responses received, although not a statutory requirement, the Council has a hackney carriage and private hire licensing policy which has kept under review, taking into account any changes in legislation or government guidance moreover, any local matters. At the meeting on the 12th of September Members requested that officers undertake a public consultation on the draft proposed policy. In total, we received 19 responses 15 from members of the trade and four from members of the public. These are set out in Appendices B, C and D on pages 139 to 154 of the agenda. The focus of responses related to the introduction of the use of the card payment systems
members may recall that, as part of the recent Hackney Carriage demand survey, it was identified that there was a need for an introduction of card payment facilities, which was a recommendation within that report.
as part of this public survey, it identified that there was a need for the introduction of card payment facilities to provide a wider choice of payment methods to the customer, in addition, the Council has also received a number of e-mails from customers raising the point that they have not been able to pay by card as our hackney carriages did not have this facility for payments these have become more frequent following the general move away from cash transactions to car payments across society post pandemic.
it is understood that some drivers have been reluctant to introduce this due to the costs they incur for card transactions and problems with signal coverage to enable payment.
it is my understanding that there are a number of card payment machines.
that have a facility that enables payments to be taken offline.
car payments have also successfully been introduced nationally to improve the customer experience.
to clarify, the provision of card payment facilities is in addition to existing cash payment options and not a replacement for taking cash, but will complete will compliment the current arrangements.
card payments have become the norm for a large percentage of the population and it is considered that the requirement to have the court facilities as an option should be included within policy, subject to consideration of the consultation responses.
the recommendation has changed and for clarity it is set out at Appendix at para 2.1 on pages 13 of the report of the agenda.
the Chair will read these out, I'm happy to take any questions, thank you Chair.
thank you.
we have two speakers on this agenda item 1, I call your name, if you please come to the microphone, make sure it's activated when you speak, you have three minutes to make your statement first, speaking this evening is Mrs. Tony Conlan,
leaving chairing members of the committee, I'm telling Conlon, I represented a number of drivers from the hackney carriage trade down at the station, I don't know if you've had the opportunity to read my 3 pouch tirade.
so I would like firstly to apologise for the tone of my written submission, I had just lost another 20 pounds on a failed card transaction and was rather triggered when I wrote that, just to add what I've already said in that written statement I've been a taxi driver in Tunbridge Wells for 20 years in that time I've had no more than 40 pounds stolen from me by people doing runners.
my loss is a lot different to those who worked nights, but daytime drivers do still get people doing runners.
I've been taking card payments for around a year now on the sum up system, and to date I've had 320 pounds stolen from me due to reasons contained within my earliest submission.
I appreciate what you are trying to achieve, but without protection from someone somewhere regarding our losses, we should be given the right to choose whether or not to take that risk.
the risk incurred by a private hire companies is nowhere near as great as Hackney's, as they normally have a home address that they have picked up from or dropped off to, it is where customers have picked up from the rank and dropped it somewhere like a restaurant or similar that we lose out as we cannot trace them.
as his earlier said, the society is moving more and more towards card payments, but 98% of the retailers, where those payments are used, if they can't pay, they don't get the good, they can't get on a train, they can't get on a bus but they can steal my time my fuel my time my usage of my vehicle and just for cough scot-free and nobody cares.
there's another accusation that people are cherry picking, so as customer comes and says that you take cards, I'm going to St John's and the Dr only say No, I don't take a card or cherry picking has been happening since Adam was a boy from the first hackney carriage people have cherry picked and it's never going to stop unfortunately as irritating as it is, so it's not really a valid reason.
that's all I have for today. Thank you very much indeed for your time,
thank you our next speaker is Mr. Clayton, Barry
could even chair CA all councillors, mostly in Barry reference spot, toes grey, said I completely agree with, but for it to be put as a safety thing is not a safety thing, there is things that you've got on Facebook and online, you can look for taxi drivers and some are not taxi drivers, that's a safety thing, not taking card payments that should not be put as a safety thing. The second thing is offline.
I have spoken to Ferry phone who I use a car pavement, miss machine that does all mobile signals, it's got a Simon net that does on offline payment. Yes, it does take, but if I get caught with an offline payment and not go to Siddle well, can't get signal and that post has got no money. That is count, it will come declined, so why should I lose money? So my suggestion is, if you do agree to this tonight, that we have got areas like Mayfield, that's got no phone signal that the taxi drivers will take the money upfront on the car payments and set it could be higher than the meter charge, but we can't get back money on the cards, but with cash we need to take cash upfront, we can get back money, so how do you expect us to work on the car payment system when we go to those areas that are not no by mobile signals?
so my argument is private hire can put this in their face Hackney Carriage, we got a set fee for pound 80, okay, somebody goes out the vote we currently take for LB 80, we lose, whatever the charges 15 20 p.
we have a private hire vehicle, they find out where they're going, how you gonna pay card, so they may cut, they say it's 10 pounds 5 pounds 60 to cover that cost of a hackney carriage, we can't hide that costs, we can't charge that over to people so please don't let us go through OK, protect the industry, thank you.
thank you.
officers, do you wish to make any points of clarification or corrections arising from the statements you've heard from our speakers, no, thank you Chair.
thank you, Members, do we have any questions for officers at this time?
to remove straight in sorry.
Councillor Robert story.
thank you, George, it is a great one, I am just trying to gather some, I suppose evidence and Sharon said that ewes e-mails from the general public, I was just wondering if we could quantify that Emily, there were two significant context.
so I believe it's for members of the public.
sorry, not where part of the consultation and prior to the consultation you you alluded to the fact that the public had been in touch with you as a licensing officer and wishing for this to go in.
I haven't got the exact figures, but I have provided them previously to Mr Barry, who asked how many complaints were received and I have provided them.
it was quite a few over the last couple
there wasn't two 20 year over the last couple of years yeah, so we have, we have been receiving complaints and we have gone back to the members of the public saying that we would be putting Mr to members for a member decision.
if, if I could just also clarify, whilst sorry Mr Barry had mentioned, not a safety thing, we did have an incident just recently, whilst I won't go into the details of them, but that driver was able to prove where he was because somebody had actually paid by card at that particular moment in time which has eliminated him from the police.
OK, thank you, Chair.
thank you, I believe, for the Christians.
Councillor Liddington,
thank you Chair.
sort of on any viable position really, I feel between balancing the needs of of the trade and the needs of the public.
one thing that strikes me spot unfair is
the idea that the tribes have already mentioned that they could take a payment of in him in an area without reception when they come into reception, that payment is then declined.
I don't know showing, are you able to elaborate on that because it seems to me that at the very least, the payment software or system has that individual's details, and I would be a lot more comfortable, I think, if I felt that drivers were had some form of recourse or were able to pursue individuals,
and if not is this something that
so your heads, I'll ask a dull second follow-up question, whether in other authorities and other areas there they face this this challenge and come up with solutions.
I have as, as part of this I have consulted with many local authorities and I've just some of the responses I have made a note of just to give Members this one responses in areas of poor connectivity, the pavement sits there and this is processed when the machine comes back in to signal another response is the wider benefits far out out by what may only be an occasional operating issue which could easily be resolved by the trade speaking to their customers about alternative payment methods so they could that could be something you could do at the start of the journey.
another response, but some drivers do type permanent and advance and refund back if the meter fairies, less and again, if connectivity issues it processes, when the machine is back in signal drivers, and this is a fact drivers are pretty good at estimating the costs so refunds are usually in the region of 20 to 30 pence which passengers are happy to give as a tip.
most passengers now, when they are in a poor signal area and are happy to pay in advance, so this is from a number of local authorities nationally or locally signal issues, we recognise this issue and will consider this if complaints are received, however this is outside of the Council's control.
costs providing a car terminal small charges generally levied by the provider for each transaction.
this was talking about more about the costs of the card machine, and the monthly cost will depend on the amount of businesses transacted and will be met by the licence holder, that's talking about the card machines that face another one was since making it mandatory we've had had next to no complaints of refused journeys and no complaints of card payments not working.
concerns that the card may be stolen, authorities' response was equally possible that cash may be stolen or counterfeit, so there is that and.
some a driver not wishing to accept a job should the customer paper card.
yes, the driver is only allowed to refuse a fare with reasonable cause, and that's not a reasonable cause to refuse a fare, so you know the generally across the country.
the trade of very generally supportive of this and the benefits in terms of safety, convenient and the passion just have access to the service, all passengers, but also we did have a concern from one particular member of the public which has now generated some additional work if you like for us what we are going to do as a safety point of view is look at potentially putting in the back of vehicles a sign perhaps can be hung on the back of the driver's headrest to save this complaints.
with this TAXI of these issues, please contact this number and this is the driver's details again more of a safety thing, but we'd be looking at that as a policy change going forward because we feel that it is is it is a safety it is we need to you know we do need to look after these people so yeah, that's something that we will be looking at as a as an additional going forward and it will be coming out for consultation.
I don't know whether that's answered you hopefully as.
and that's very helpful, thank you, sir.
thank you.
Councillor Oppo,
I'm not sure from lots of post questions to the trade or do after so opposing to the offices.
okay, questions should come through the Chair to officers, okay or a mock question would be on the balance of the concerns to sort balance. The concerns from the trade in instances where there has been issues with insufficient funds or connectivity, how is the trade silk dealt with those issues? How they deal with it at present? Do they just sort of waive the fair all has it been aware that they have managed it currently that we may have considered all that we could sort of work into
considerations.
no, that's that's actually something that the trade would normally deal with, we wouldn't actually get involved with that.
thank you very briefly, that would be a criminal offence so that there should be requests in that respect.
so could I just ask members of the public to stay stay quiet while the meetings in progress?
thank you.
Councillor Wellington, thank you, Chairman, thanking the speakers as well.
and thank you Sharon for for for for the interaction and answering the questions so far, this is more of a sort of general process one, but I think it is relevant to the debate this evening.
am I right and remembering that we have a regular process of reviewing the fees charged for hackney carriages as part of the Council's business? The reason I asked this is because clearly there is going to be some additional cost to taxi drivers, I suspect that when we introduce this, most people are going to start paying their affairs with card and there's a 2 or 3% charge for most providers for that. Likewise, it was noted earlier that there will be dead may well be an increase in people, not paying their affairs
my sort of back of a cigarette packet calculations were again that was about another 1 or 2%, so I wondered if you know, when we come to that period, we can factor in those additional cost to operating as part of the general overall review of of costs of the charges.
OK if, if we do review the affairs, but that is actually the trade would request that that's not something that we would request, and I am sure that the trade will going forward, and yes, we can look at that.
in regards to
the trick charging at an additional fee, because I've heard some have asked for an additional fee if they could charge an additional fee that can't happen at surcharge and that can't happen, so yes, it may potentially, but what you do have to be really careful of is that you don't charge yourself out because I think,
we were fairly high up in the fare charts recently, well up until a few months ago, we think we've moved down in the fair table, but I think once we do put in for a fair review, we're gonna go back up and again the trade need to be careful they don't trot herself out.
thank you, Councillor Scott.
thank you, it's just a comment, I was wondering, is it possible, but the trade is currently losing customers because they can't accept cards because I've certainly witnessed a family waiting at a bus stop who wanted to get a taxi home because the bus was late but they only had payment on their phones with them which I think a lot of people do these days they just go around with.
the ability to pay on their phones, so they couldn't even get any cash out, and I think frequently people just don't have the ability to access cash as well as not having any on them, and I, I suspect, that the drivers do lose customers for that reason.
and I also just wanted to perhaps ask you from the e-mails that you've received from people complaining about not being able to use cards in taxis, I just think it's worth making clear, probably it's it's more of an inconvenience, isn't it, it's part potentially just being stranded somewhere and not able to get home safely?
I mean, what we are looking to do is yes, you are right, they are losing customers, I believe, and from what I'm hearing going forward, should Members agree it should they have these machines put in the vehicles they will be required to put stickers in there so people know which vehicles except cards?
then you may get the well, actually it would be a mandatory requirement, so they would all have to have one, so there'll be no cherry picking there.
Councillor Hill yeah,
I think I'd like to thank BA thank the psychiatry coming in and I think they've come in and maybe we should listen to them if they're saying they've got a problem with with this I mean we all know that that taxi drivers are not earning the money that they used to do that a lot of them are struggling, we we have got an awful lot here and especially on the Hackney ones where if you if you're in a shop and you your card declined if declined and like they say they have no no way of going back to these people because they don't know where to go in.
so and once people clock continents, we know what people like it can't be you know.
so I do think we should listen to what the TAC taxi people are asking us to do, and I think if we all know that there are pockets where you can't it doesn't work and when it does work like cancel these things and if it then gets decline but it's too late because you've already dropped them all that they've lost out from and this is a lot of money for some of the taxi drivers, especially the Hackney one,
as I say, it's not like the private one, so I mean, should we not be be listening to the the trade insane ongoing and I'm a bit concerned that all the other people think it's OK all the other areas, so why does it not work in Tunbridge Wells?
seems a bit odd.
OK what the trade can do is ask in advance this this is, you know, it seems to be a way round it, the other bar borrowers are getting round it, but I could just name just a few of the borrowers that are accepting cold snap will that have as a mandatory requirement. Colchester Guildford St opens Transport for London, Brighton and Hove Tunbridge and Morgan have just recently last week, introduced it Knightstone, they've just finished their consultation and the recommendation is to implement it. 7 0 s district council again, their recommendation is to implement a mandatory requirement and Ashford Borough Council also looking into it. So I've sort of gone from one end to the other and yet
whilst it is not a response really, but it's you know, this does happen, it happens where people do ramis with cash or they don't have cash, so it's.
put it on par with that.
I come back back and say, so it is no way that we can find a way around me for the trade so that they don't have to take court, or are we found they must take cards?
I think the way forward is that they have to take cards.
it is the way it's going, but it's you know, I think collectively the trade could perhaps approach a provider to find out if you know, if they all
collectively get together, look at some providers and see who can provide what I was told, I think, is if you've got four and five G on your phones, then it is possible that you will get connectivity in these darker areas if you like,
thank you, Councillor Harper.
SA is on par, but the last one, though some my question would be by the sounds of things court premises and it is an inevitability at some stage, but what I would like is, would it be possible for there to be some sort of guidance around these tougher issues in terms of payment connectivity is that something in the council could put together to support drivers when his friend might be being rolled out?
well, it's not going to be for a few weeks, I think we've said the festive February.
we can offer some assistance, but actually it's a business decision, it's how they run their businesses, I don't think it would be appropriate for the authority to get too involved.
yes, I think you misunderstood me slightly, why mint was more around the criminality element about perhaps not being able to take payment, and people doing one as Helen pointed out as it is a criminal offence, so it was something that we could probably update on the website or just pointing out when these instances does happen at getting contact we've so on and so forth.
I think anything to do with payments and manners, et cetera the traders are aware that they should contact the police, albeit that the police are very busy and I can say, Ms Conlon, not in their
that is what they have to do, it's you know, there's just no getting round it.
sorry just to provide more assistance as well, it's not going to be appropriate, or or potentially unlawful for the council to stop providing advice on types of co-payment or criminality or anything like that, however, as Sharon has said, any concerns should be feedback fed back to the police reported to the police and I'm sure a licensing team would be very
I am interested to hear about things as they progressed to see how matters are reviewed if this policy is introduced.
Councillor Johnson.
I don't know if this is actually because it is still questioned, isn't it, it's not the discussion just trial of wording in a way I mean, because I agree totally with.
Councillor Hill, because the speakers are very, very experienced, taxi drivers, you know they've been doing it.
for so long, and I really do feel that until.
you know there's a a way that the cards can be guaranteed.
I don't think you know, I don't think it's right.
force them, that's turning into a question that.
you're not going to you're not going to be able to guarantee that I don't believe I mean they are, yet they are experts, I've been here 22 years working with the trade, and I know you know the pitfalls that they've got one et cetera.
this there's not gonna be a way round that I'm afraid.
Councillor Johnson, just just a thought because
I hate it when I get in a taxi and the downtown car payment you know, but then they said we can go to cashmere machines which is great, but then, as Councillor Shah said, the problem is that people are using phones nowadays, so the only thing is if people when they're getting the cab say do take card if attached Driver said yes we do but unfortunately machines broken today so sorry about that I mean how does that possibility?
work
if the machine is broken, they need to notify, as they will need to notify us of that and.
we will deal with that as and when it happens, but you know, I've spent an awful lot of time speaking to many other borrowers.
in the space of this time and earlier than than this.
and you know every other borrowers Gareth for the same thing, it's there's not all this, there's no way of getting round it.
thank you.
Councillor Hayward yeah, thank you, I'd like to sort of frame this and that I get the point which was made that shoplifters can't go up to the counter.
have their card declined and take the goods, so so I get that entirely, but my view is that we're now 2023 and most people Councillor Sharratt made the point, don't have necessarily, I I, I personally always have a little bit of cash in my pocket.
but most people don't when I say most with a small limb, so I take exactly the point that it's different to shoplifting, and I think that's sort of the impression that people get.
but runners from taxis have, I've never done, one obviously.
I was sure I would have got rugby tackled before I reached the kerb, but they've always happened and they will continue to happen, so I do take the point about the card payments and runners are an issue however I think it was Councillor Lidstone made the point that if they have a card declined you've got their details and you have recourse o you do not OK I will I wasn't sure about that.
OK, so I'm sorry, I was going to make the point that you have recourse in law, but I stand corrected, thank you,
thinking David, there was any questions for officers, I do a section at the moment, but I do apologise, sorry, does anybody have any further questions we do have foot Councillor this there is a question.
yeah, thank you that I am in favour of that as a helpful clarification and I'll come on to that maybe when we debate them around my concerns around the sort of following up with people whose call is declined another just very brief question I noticed one piece of feedback from and one of the drivers around private hire as,
having being able to use the term taxi.
in the in the name, and the suggestion was that this wasn't necessarily something that was illegal, but is it something that we have the power to do anything about it strikes me, as is probably a bit misleading, if you use private hire companies called Joe taxi or whatever you know when you turn up that people will associate you with the taxi,
thank you, Chair, so Lauren has as it stands, is it only taxis comply for hire, so using the word taxi in her name is not in itself unlawful, you would need to look at the facts and the circumstances of any particular case, what is the car doing, what does it say on it, where does it say that it would be a matter for the particular circumstances and if
those circumstances were considered to be unlawful, then the local authority can take action in that respect, there is best practice guidance on taxis actually the they've been in consultation for a long time and has just come out the updated guidance, so I don't think there's anything in there but if there is it will be considered and if there were any changes I'm sure you will be notified of it.
thank you any Councillor Johnson.
what I don't understand is.
why we have to make it mandatory, because the only people who are going to lose out is the taxi driver, because if you, if you know, when you get in a taxi and you say they say, we only take cash if the people with the finance don't have the they've only got the fire and I said there's no cash machines and all that then the taxi driver themselves are gonna lose that.
fair big because of that, so.
I am sorry if I die, I just don't understand why we have to why we can't just simply say, Well, you know, it's okay to have someone's just doing cash until a facility comes along, that is, you know, 99% proof,
OK for a hackney carriage, they should be able to, you should be able to hail a Hackney just like that, and if you do just like that and he comes over and I can only take cash, but then he's plying for hire, but actually you can't use him because you don't have the cash you only have a card, that's one of the reasons.
one of the many
I just like to out to Sharon's comment.
it's basically saying why why do we have to make it mandatory because we are getting complaints from people who are being left unable to get home?
or are being driven to cash points and then shot the extra in order to to to to go and get the cash, so it's about people not being refused a journey, and that's why we need to make it mandatory, thank you.
thank you, Councillor Hewitt, 1 Dan, I think
and I understand that you know, people are in that situation, but I think we have to look at the trade and it's their business, and are we telling businesses how they have to run their business?
it doesn't seem quite right if they can't I mean there are lots of places that they cash-only, so I always say that we're dictating to taxis that they're not cash-only, they have, you know, they have to do what we tell them to do, sorry,
it is if you want to be a taxi driver in Tunbridge Wells, we have a policy and the policy is for everybody, not just individuals, so yeah, there's a framework that we all have to work through, the trade have to work to as we do as well in taking any action, thank you.
Councillor Liz Ashton.
sorry, I have another question, it's actually something about Helen in your response, you mentioned the new guidance that government guidance has been released. He said yet in the our response to the consultation, page 1 3 9 we've we've replied, because one of the drivers Driver 4 7 4 9, has suggested that. Why don't we wait until the new government guidance put them has come out before we set a new policy, there's going to last five years and the response from officers there was that that it doesn't appear to be a date for release, and yet you're saying now that it has been released, so I guess might very long winded question is, are we confident this policy is in line with the guidance? If not, you know, we're setting ourselves in one direction for five years
OK, yeah, it only came out last week, I believe, and I've had a brief look at it, some of the main points won't actually apply to us because we're already doing it so.
we can review this policy any time, so even if we put the policy in today, we can review it next week if we feel that there is enough changes, if it warrants enough from the guidance for us to make amendments, we will do.
yeah
just to add to that, the guidance does actually cover every aspect, so the policy will cover a lot more than the guidance this. This is the best practice guidance, so it's not even the only guidance document relating to taxis. There is a huge amount of guidance and policy that taxis and private hire vehicles have to follow. The Council's policy is specific to the Council and what you're discussing now is changes to that policy, including mandatory car payments. Some of them may be relevant for the best practice guidance, most of them, I think, as Sharon has said, are already in the policy, so they wouldn't even be covered by this
but really, what you're looking at is your policy.
and the changes to your policy to not sorry and if I could just add that the main considerations for licensing authorities at the moment from what we can say is 11 points that's all in the whole guidance, one of these 11 points I think we've got most of them already written into our policy.
thank you, I think that's clarification on offer here.
thank you any further questions.
just go one before we go to have a discussion, because we talk about come to Con contactless payment and cards, and everything does that include things like good-paying, equal-pay and all those various payments as well in a contact this.
whatever suits Surrey.
can you repeat that when we talk about contacts, we normally mentioned about card payments, so would they include also like Google pay, equal pay and the various?
others than there might be around to cover myself, yeah yeah shudder.
there were no further questions event or member discussion.
if anybody wants to say anything.
thank you, Councillor Fitzsimons.
thank you Chair, I think it is very annoying if you get into a taxi and they don't take a card, and you do only have a couple of quid on you.
but.
surely the way round and I totally appreciate.
but our speakers have said tonight, but.
surely the way round is to ask for payment in advance.
we've already been said that our taxi drivers are very good judges of what.
the journey will take how much it will cost, so I mean, as far as they are concerned, there is no requirement for them to wait until the end of the journey to to obtain a fare.
so.
if we're picking, if we're being picking one up at the station or something take the money first.
Councillor Wilmington.
thank you Chair.
I think that are.
I mean, I just sort of alluded to there somewhat ameer in my question earlier, I you know clearly introducing card payments will incur a greater cost because you have to pay a small fee for each car transaction and, as you know,
believe believe that you know fully when, when we're told by the trade that there is a
an increase is still relatively small, untraceable, an increase of of people of non-payment.
when you introduce car transactions, I would fully anticipate this being something that the over a short period of time, the trade could get a rough estimate of how much the additional cost was for them to do business and then come to us asking for an uplift to their of of the charges to accommodate for that. That seems to me the obvious way to do things when, when the cost of fuel went up dramatically last year, that's exactly what they did. They came to us and said Well, you know it used to cost me X to drive 10 miles and now it cost me why so charges need to be changed to a
adjust that, and that seems to me the obvious way forward. I think it all stems from this. I do understand why we do it, but it stemmed from the slightly odd position that we as people who mostly don't really know anything about the taxi trade are asked to essentially regulator in Tunbridge Wells, which might suggest a wider discussion for another time, but maybe as I appreciate so anything that we can do anything about, but it doesn't seem to me like the best way of doing things. Ultimately, we know what I would like to see. Is it being a more market-driven thing? So generally I'm very happy to to look to listen to the to the trade when they say actually our fees and charges should be desperate for them.
but my point with that really is that, were this sector, subject to market forces, in the way that basically the rest of our economy is, I have full confidence that they already would have adopted card payments because I can feel confidence owner because every single other aspect of the economy that is subject to market forces has already done that. There are very, very few places now that only accept cash, so I think somebody touched on earlier phrase views that's the way of the world. I think this is the word world. I would welcome I I think we should go through with this with these changes, and I would very much welcome once the trade has worked out, exactly how much
we know the increase, their costs have come out of, I've come out of these changes that then to come to us again and suggest an uplift of their fees to tifo.
thank you, Councillor Hayward, yes, thank you, Chair, I'd actually like to follow up on on Councillor Fitzsimons points, and that is that the point was made about Mayfield, being an area of not having enough coverage for the card machine and,
I think that asking for payment first if you knew because as soon as the person gets in the cab, they're saying I'm going to, such as such an address at Mayfield and you may be inclined to ask, are you intending to pay by cash or card if it's card I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you for a prepayment now.
the taxi drivers, I would assume, and I'm sure, know, the dead areas for their card machines, so I take the Councillor Fitzsimons point that maybe pre-payment, if the contract is to go to somewhere where they know there's not good coverage.
Councillor Whiteman,
thank you, Chair, and during the discussion. It is clear that Sharon has spoken to numerous other borrowers, where this is up and running. On the flip side, I'm sure other borrowers have taxi associations and perhaps our taxi drivers could speak to them to see how they are working round this one and how they have coped with it, because presumably it is working in some form because other borrowers have still got plenty of taxi drivers and it is working. Regarding the second point regarding the chart, the extra charges on the card machine, I think it was Tony wrote in her
letter that these charges can they can charge them back and have to wait to the end of the year for the charges they do get back at some point, so they will be returned to taxi drivers, it's not going to cost them more in the end if I'm reading this correctly.
and I feel I do appreciate how difficult it is, and you know with coverage, it's not great, I know there are areas that I go out to where you can't get coverage.
but that is improving and I feel, whilst it's difficult OK with Councillor Fitzsimons, Hayward, you've asked for your fair upfront and you'll cop it that way, that's the longer the traveller has the option, but I think we have little choice or any but to go forward in my opinion.
Councillor White, thank you and yeah, I'm going to agree with Councillor Wakeman and I I do have sympathy, but I can't help thinking that this. This has to happen at some time and if it doesn't happen in 2023, the same conversation more poorly with we've had next year as well, and I think at some point we're gonna have the Troy unit, people gonna have to go through the teething issues, but after doing this, and I think it's probably needs to be done sooner rather than later just to kind of keep up as Councillor Wellington said, it's how if this was not regulated, it probably would have happened before, so I think we just so I would be supportive of it tonight.
thank you, Councillor Quora.
thank you, I mean when we someone else will listen to the arguments it just seems to be. It seems to be not monastery unfair, but to refuse to provide and yet to impose a situation where they have to upgrade their taxes and incur additional costs, but then present no guidance on how this could be done in a way that they are unable to get at don't lose out money just seems a bit, it doesn't feel like it meets in the middle of the trade for me anyway, I use an annexe and if I want to pay mama's because there's a lot of providers, I don't take a mix if that happens in a cab, I'm not sure how that ends up becoming a work around or how that's even met, and it seems like it's something which we impose into a new gardens and then sorry, then the then trade have to swerve, adopt it or find a way of working around that, and at this particular point I'm not sure whether that's that's met in the way day. It should be, or do I that if the artful, comfortable so Vaughan, one way or another against and with it
yeah, that's just what I had to say, thank you.
Councillor Hill.
and I just wondered if we would say about taxi, drivers can say to the customers, can you pay upfront, I mean, have we spoken to the the association, the are they happy to do that because I'm sure I've never walked into a shop and been asked to pay before I've bought anything, I mean you know, it's something that it doesn't fit fit good, does it all, I've never been in a taxi to pay before I've actually arrived anyway, so I mean, have we spoken to the trade to see how they feel about that because it's
it doesn't fit, doesn't sit right with me, but you know maybe it doesn't sit right with them either, and it's their business at the end of the day.
this is member discussion, so it's more of a question but yeah.
year.
OK, Councillor Longsden.
I'm not sure I can answer that I mean, I suppose I guess, if you think about a business, this, the drivers, well, I say the drawings, I'm gonna go anyway,
there's more chance of the the passenger disappearing from the driver, so obey you might end up being dropped off somewhere else, but you know I I think I think that's a reasonable compromise if you feel, if you're going to an area that doesn't have signal if I were in the driver asks me to set the luxury there's no signal where where,
you've asked to be dropped off, do you mind, paying upfront, I think I'd probably say yes.
I still think I don't think it's a satisfactory situation and I I feel for the drivers you know not, I think I can't believe that if I try paying with a debit card and a and it was rejected that you know that I could you know the my bank wouldn't come out and try and get the money to you, I just can't believe that so I hope that that situation changes in weather whether that's in banking or ooze some other
some other way,
I I guess one thing, and I think Councillor Wilmington made a really good point about the costs, and again I've got looking at my notes for tonight's meeting, I've got the the workings of, I think, Mr Barocci, from one from from May, from June last year, with the increase of affairs, and I think at that time we took a decision to increase fares when there was a bit of pushback on that to protect the drivers. It feels to me that this is a bit the other way, so a bit of given a bit of take and I feel like for me personally, I feel like
you know and and we can again look at look at pricing in the future and try and balances out, but it feels like I feel a bit more comfortable supporting this on the basis of of having supported the drivers with that.
thank you
good, Councillor White.
Johnson.
just really quickly on this paying in advance. I mean, all other transport systems do often pay in advance. Like only this week I paid 19 pounds per train ticket which I then didn't have to use, and they wouldn't give me a refund, so I think that's a fairly, it doesn't feel I could really I feel it feels like a model that you could take into them into the taxi trade because it's what you do in a lot of other transport issues, so I'd feel that there could be a behaviour that could be adopted and that people are used to doing that because they pay for the train or the bus or wherever it is in advance.
general Fund
the trouble is, and it's a great idea, pay up front, but the problem is we live in Tunbridge Wells and the traffic here is is terrible, so I mean you know, when I get in a cab.
it's like independent when if I've called one member and I know the price, so it's going to be he asked say, how much is it to highbrows they say ought to set for of that so that so that's fine but as you say when you're hailing one and is it's porn of Ryan you've just changed one, I'm gonna jump into a cab the first thing I think people normally say how much do you think it's going to cost to get so-and-so and the tax rise will depending,
dinner between this and that, depending on the the traffic tonight and Hussey Thomas register, so even though it's a really good idea to go at font pace so it seems so complicated, you know I just feel that.
it's
I know that you've had complaints from people, but at the end of the day I don't think we should be at this moment in time forcing something that's still not really it's not a brilliant move, they've lost a lot of money and I do believe,
you know what they say when they say you know, yeah, from runners, we've lost so much, but from this card system, so they've obviously had the card system and found that you know they've lost an awful lot of money and I just think they should be given the choice and you know that's my opinion so I won't be supporting tonight.
Councillor Roberts, did I see your hand up?
sorry, yes, thank you Chair.
just think that it will, let you say we're moving into the what we are into the 21st century and we must be able to take customers to be able to use any more forms of payment and that there should be a made available to them and certainly on social media in my area there have been complaints where taxis them and them been able to accept card payments, so I do know the support.
I mean, I jumped into a taxi yesterday in Bristol and it's actually do, I was quite confident with me, asking it, was I paying by card or cash, and I enquired what was different, was that there's a minimum charge for for paying by card and I managed to squeeze 6 pounds 40 out of my wallet to pay him in cash but I'm sure that,
now it will benefit them in the long term, and maybe we'd be reluctant to to move over to that, but I suspect that businesses will be far more.
people by access for people trying to get a bus, stop trying to get a taxi, and, I think, the the hopefully though, it will raise the the product productivity of the industry in this area, but I can't see it's been a bad thing really.
Councillor O'Hara, I am speaking to the point of payment in advance, it's a flat payment in advance, opens more avenues for complaints, mainly because it's not something that is customer, I'm hacking higher cabinet to something which then becomes an issue where, if you ask me if you asked me to paint a plan to enter into a cab, I would start to sort of consider the reasons behind it and it wouldn't just be connectivity to all sorts of wonderful things associated with that so that just opens another avenue for consideration if that's something that you want to push the trading in to trade into Surrey.
thank you.
Councillor Sherratt,
thank you, yeah, I just wanted to speak, I think it is difficult, so I I do have sympathy with the taxi drivers.
but I think I'm on balance I would support the course payments because I just know that I am I I would say that I'm pretty much certain that they they are losing customers from from from not accepting cards and,
I also know, from personal experience of being a frequent taxi user that it can add considerable stress, think to a journey, thinking about where am I going to get?
where am I going to get some cash to pay for the taxi, and sometimes it's at night, sometimes it's dark, the there sometimes are quite stressful reasons for the journey.
and so yeah, on balance, I would say.
but I think that this is the direction of travel and that it will have to happen sooner or later.
thank you, Mum, conscious, that hello Councillors of have spoken.
what I'm not hearing, though is.
maybe a overall majority, I don't know, certainly a split, so if I can read the main recommendation as was mentioned earlier, the recommendation is actually on page 13.
and this is to agree to the provision and adopt the hackney carriage and private hire licensing policy 2023 2028 with amendments.
do we want to yeah, how do we do you want to do a vote on a show of hands?
so those in favour of adopting it.
at 8.49 feature.
and those against.
to against her.
anybody abstaining.
one abstention.
thank you, so the motion is carried.
thank you, Chairman.
6 b) Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing: Licence Fees and Charges 2024/2025
so the exciting agenda is 6 B is the hackney carriage and private hire licensing, the licensing fees and charges for 2024 2025 this report starts on page 1 5 5 of the agenda, Mr Georgiou, please present your report.
thank you Chair.
hackney, carriage and private hire licence. In facing charges, the Council is required to review licence fees and charges annually to ensure that they are either covering all costs or contributing significantly towards the overall costs of providing the service it is proposed. Members approve applying a 5% increase to enable licensing to continue to work towards the medium term objective of being self-financing. Based on this financial year, the taxi accounts are predicted a deficit of 11,674. The proposed fees would come into effect from the 1st of April 2024, subject to consideration of any unresolved written objections at LA at the Licensing Committee on the 19th of March
if Members approved the proposed increase to the hackney carriage and private hire licensing fees and charges, as set out in Appendix B pages 1 6 2 2 1 6 5 of your report, officers will notify those interested parties via e-mail where we have their details and a notice will be placed in the local newspaper and on the Council's website for fees and charges officers here are happy to take any questions Members may have thank you Chair.
thank you, though we have no speakers on this agenda item, some members, do you undertake questions for the officers at this time, please blend questions?
Councillor Waddington, yes, I just wanted to clarify something sorry it wasn't I wasn't 100% clear on just re-reading the instead of a day of meetings I'm just trying to get things right in my correct in my head.
are we talking about and increasing the the fees and charges sort of across the board for all sorts of different licences we've got you mentioned.
you mentioned you know that.
licences that that the yeah taxis need to go through but as it is it across the board was what we were talking about.
we we have the these, are the taxi fees and charges, so to become a licensed driver or to renew your licence or for an operator's licence, this is what these fees and charges are for, and also the administration hub fees that's all to do with the taxes this particular report.
apologies, I was looking at Appendix A and looking at the proposed fees for 2020 for 2025, which has other things alongside that, but if we're just talking about taxis and that's that's great, thank you.
J Councillor Hayward, yes, thank you.
would you suggest that these increases are in line with inflation below inflation above inflation?
but I think we've gone if you like in the middle and get the current inflation rate is 4.6% from my investigations.
and 15th of November it was 4.6% in October and that's down from 6.7, so we're putting them up 5%, so where, if you lie in the middle?
thank you, Councillor Lisburn.
sorry, this is a question I should Austen advance page 164.
the other fees.
can I just confirm these, these fees are correct because they just seem a bit all over the place, so some I mean there might be logic behind that, but some of them have gone up, someone gone down.
if I can Sharon Bamburgh take this question because they do relate to the partnership phase.
thank you.
yes, so what we've done recently is a deep dive on some of the
costings and timings that everything takes to do, that the central processing team do commonly referred to as the hub team, who are based at Sevenoaks, and do processing for all four partners of all applications to do with any kind of licence that we have to cover and when 7 or 7 aux tend to do stop doing theirs earlier than the other three in terms of the annual fee review.
so the officer at 7.00 dorks had asked me, can you have a look at the hub costings and timings just to be sure that nothing needs to change that there are, you know, we're not just going for a inflationary increase, are they still accurate, so I did some
lots of work, actually not just something like a lot of work on that, and what we found is that, due to changes in some of the processes in terms of stream, streamlining how we're doing things, sometimes it's better tech or where we might be delivering an online solution but rather than an old fashioned paper solution we've adjusted some of the timings whereby it allowed for the costings to go down sometimes quite drastically there are other costings where there may be supplies.
so I'll give you an example, and I haven't even looked at this, but I hope it's going to bear out the cost of a bracket, for example, yes, the current price is 21 pounds, but that's because it had been around that for some number of years,
and just gone up on an inflationary basis, and what hadn't happened was a response to Keogh. Sort of to conversation about is that still the true cost and the reality was no, it wasn't and a conversation simply hadn't happened between the manager of the hub team in Tunbridge Wells, who at the time the only people who used brackets on the on the backs of cabs to say actually it's about twice the price and you are under charging, so we've basically remedied anything like that where we've discovered the cost is no different to what it used to be. So this is a silver
trying to sort it out and get it as accurate as possible, because we are only ever ever charged with and interested in covering costs. There is no element at all of anybody trying to make a profit, far from it, it's very much a standard principle across all of licensing that is supposed to be self-financing. So that's where you've seen some of them go up and down quite drastically, rather than just being a standard, or we'll just do the inflationary increase and will not even thinking about we're challenging ourselves all the time, but obviously you can't kind of do that deep dive on costings every single year on. Unless somebody says, I think that that's wrong, and I want you to look at that. In that case, I will look at the smaller section of fees like the hub team, for example, where I'm being asked on the taxi fees to do that
so I hope that answers the question.
it does yes and good to hear as well about you the drive to kind of automated to try and reduce the workload, because obviously that then results in there'd be a mountain of the trade have to pay in fees yeah thank you sir.
thank you any more questions, if not, we'll move into remembered discussion.
anybody wished to discuss the matter?
it's like No no case, then we move on to the recommendation, and the recommendation as set out in the report is that the Committee approves the proposed fees as set out in Appendix A for publication, consultation and implementation with effect from the 1st of April 2024 subject to consideration of any resolved written objections at the Licensing Committee on the 19th March 2024.
are we all agreed agreed?
thank you.
so the motion is carried.
7 Licensing Fees and Charges 2024/2025
so item 7 is licensing fees charges for 2024 2025, this report stalls on page 166 of your agenda, Ms Georgiou, please present your report.
OK, thank you, Chair.
lessons in miscellaneous facing.
to consider the various miscellaneous licensing fees and charges as set out in Appendices A B and C of the agenda, actually the patient numbers seem to be different, is 1 6 6 in the agenda.
appendix D Licensing Act fees and charges are set in statute, therefore these are not discretionary and they are pages.
1 7 4 0 my 1 7 4.
in respect of these fees, there is no requirement for any consultation should members approve the proposed fees that will come into effect on the 1st of April 2024 I'm happy to take any questions Members may have.
thank you, we have no speakers on this agenda item.
do you have any questions for officers at this time?
junior just wait, Councillor Brimington, gone.
thank you.
Councillor Wimbledon,
thank you.
yes, I'm sorry, I feel I should should start this question with an apology speech spin along there, apparently and.
I was
I have got this this agenda item confused with the previous agenda item, so apologies for Mayor that that explains my slightly confusing question last time.
my question really is around these charges and I appreciate that the increases are in line with.
you know what they are, what the will, that's what what the fees and charges are this year.
but it jumped out at me that some of the charges some of the fees are substantially higher than others, and my understanding is that.
across across different types of of of of activity, and my understanding is that these fees should be set at a cost recovery point rather than any other point so, for example, the fee to the proposed free for the grant of a three-year scrap metal licences 570 pounds but the cost of a sexual entertainment licence is 2,717 pounds so that's five times the cost.
and I'd just be really interested to find out why that differential exists and and how that's been, how those figures have been calculated on a on a cost basis.
subject to what air sharing to my left might say, I'll attempt to sort of answer that in in in South Africa, in the round, as it were.
so the example that you've given a sexual entertainment venue, I appreciate we may not have any so, you've never had you've never had the experience of having to deal with one.
application, those applications are intense in the sense of what is required for them in terms of all the advertising and, as you can appreciate the anticipation of what the public will see and all of the work that has to go into.
getting that to a committee and then thereafter the consistent and regular checking for Keogh from a compliance point of view, because of it is that type of venue, even though one I'm saying this from my experience of working in central London for 20 years, so I do have experience of dealing with lots of these kinds of venues.
and it's as much about going in and making sure that you are that they are operating properly and that nobody is being either exploited or any criminal activity going on or not elaborate further, but I hope you can understand what I might allude to.
I think you've got to, if you like, charge appropriately to cover that cost for the entire year, so are you not just dealing with a new or renewal application which has to be advertised, it has to have to go to committee, no matter what, and then you're going there on a regular basis scrap metal, for example in comparison very different,
in that we don't have, we only have a right to go on to a licensed site, we don't have many of them and if we were to try and go to go to an unlicensed site we would have to go with the police because only they've got the power of entry, we don't and we certainly can't, if you like, go chase down the scrap metal collectors in the sense that you can't follow them, that you can't you know you can legally stop them
so we charge of what we think is an appropriate fee to cover the cost of that, but the the cost of dealing with a scrap metal dealer application.
for as officer time is a lot less than what, if you had a sexual entertainment venue, which is going to attract a lot of attention from a lot of different parties that you are gonna have to deal with and have to answer lots of questions have to write London committee reports get evidence and, like I say the ongoing compliance costings, that you you have to go, that's just my general experience of why there's such a difference and don't get me wrong.
if you are thinking about the Hemmings case or not, I'm not sure No okay, I'll not even go into that, then that was all about the fees that you could charge and whether or not you could charge, you know, astronaut go viscous, I did work for Westminster who were charging those astronomical fees and I think it was up to 20 or 30,000 by the time on that when,
you know for for a sexual entertainment venue licence and they have to try and justify why, and anyway, that's that, if I could also just come in when we did have a sexual entertainment venue.
every year that come up for renewal we had objections, and not just 10 20 people we could have up to 100 people were attending, so there was a lot more work involved than a scrap metal dealer.
if I may just want to follow up, I totally understand what you're saying and I think Morgan author, my question is really motivated by a an eagerness that we don't find ourselves in a position where we're having to explain what might be a at what might be viewed by some as a abusive,
fee that we're charging, because basically we don't want these types of businesses, which is clearly not what the fees are, therefore, so I totally appreciate everything you said an experiment, and that's given me a lot of confidence, thank you.
I mean, is there DUI, I'm not, I'm not asking for the details, but I mean, do we have a sort of detailed rube record, detailed kind of documentation that explains how we've landed on the number that we've landed on?
some some document somewhere that covers that, how that figure is being reviewed, not that I'm aware of it, would have been set initially with the finance team, in conjunction with them, with the amount of work that we would have proceeding to it, because also with a sexual entertainment venue there is also a lot more consultation there's nothing.
with scrap metal dealers we are just merely an e-mail over to the environment when the police, the sexual entertainment, is a public consultation, so there is a lot more work involved.
thank you.
Councillor Paul didn't speak.
so the Kushner had gone who was considering we have no sexual entertainment in Tunbridge Wells, on bad-looking in this instance is a fee increase necessary because arguably it isn't it just more of a barrier to entry.
Councillor
now I don't think so, we have to have a fee yes, because if somebody does approaches and even if it is now or in a year's time, we could've obviously be able to justify our fees, what they are now and then what they would be say in a year's time or because they won't go up salaries go up, everything goes up, so we just have to follow along.
Councillor Johnson.
I think he's extremely cheap for the licence and we could really double it easily because they make a fortune in those kind of businesses in London and not how I've actually been training.
nor have I ever done any scrap metal.
but that we all might subject, but you know sort of.
is the possibility of increasing the fee, so we don't get them in Tonbridge.
probably not.
so now our our our policies there, if somebody wishes to apply they can and it will come before members.
thank you.
Key any Councillor Carrigan settlements of Councillor Johnson's point, arguably if we dropped the fees, considering the amount of revenue that could come in from those who are companies in the that incentive.
but it dropped the face.
there'd be nobody to go out there because we won't be charging in a full way.
thank you.
any further questions which going to Member discussion I can have begun to Membe discussion, members like to discuss it anybody.
Councillor Warmington.
yeah, as I said before, I'm really really reassured by the responses that we've had from the officers, and of course, it is very important to bear in mind that we set these fees, we are obligated to set these fees to meet the costs and are not for either to encourage or discourage businesses to to come into the borough. So I thank you that that that was a very encouraging answer, I mean I and I'm very happy to support these increases. They seem sensible to me
obviously, bearing in mind that sort of wider conversation we've had about fees increases earlier today, the only thing that I would, I would say, is
are thought to to to to leave you with, is you know, actually, I think, probably having some robust documentation in place that explains how we have come to these numbers, I think, could be a a useful sort of pre-emptive measure but other than that I'm I'm very happy to approve.
thank you anybody else.
no, I'm thinking OK, the recommendation as set out in the report.
is that the Committee approves the proposed fees that, as an appendix April of complication, consultation implementation, the effect note was not sorry, I am reading the wrong one, I do apologise, because what you gave me a turn, a page OK, sorry the recommendation.
that the Committee approves the fee levels to take effect from the 1st of April 2024, as set out in Appendices A B and C of the report, and note the nationally set fees for 2024 2025 as set out in Appendix D are we agreed, agree the
thank you, so the motion is carried.
8 Pavement Licensing - review of policy and setting of fees
agenda item 8 is the pavement licensing review of policy and setting of fees this report stars on page 181 of the agenda.
Ms Bramble, please present your report, Bamburgh Surrey.
thank you Chair, so before you is the reports that have brought you to.
adopt the policy,
we, we've got an existing policy which we had to bring in very quickly, so hopefully I've set out in the report enough of the background for you to understand what happened with this in Covid very C you know with the NIB we got about weeks' notice from Kent County Council that we have to do pavement licensing after it had been said that they were gonna do it so policy was brought in very quickly.
and fees were set at the statutory cap of 100 pounds and what has happened recently is following the levelling.
lovingly Open Regeneration Act, receiving Royal Assent on the 26th of October of this year, we now need to revise our policy to make those the policy in line with the legislative changes that were brought about as a result of that legislation, and also it's an opportunity for us now to set fees because of the various the statutory caps.
and made a renewable process if you like that didn't exist before so, whereas there was a 100 pounds statutory capped fee, it is now.
500 pounds for a new one statutory cap, I should say not as in that's what we're gonna charge and a 350 pound cap for a renewal, so the report covers two aspects, one is the amendment
it and adoption of the policy, and I just need to confirm that, in terms of my recommendations, the wording needs to be slightly different, I believe it's been circulated to you in advance, but just to read it out my recommendation, the first one,
should read as follows that the Committee considered the proposed pavement licensing policy, which has been drafted to take into account the recent changes in legislation and adopted to take effect upon a commencement of schedule, 22 of the levelling open Regeneration Act, 2023
and that draft policy was part of the report, I believe attract changes version was also circulated all to you to make it easier to understand where the changes were happening.
I do have hard copies if anybody needed them as well, but hopefully.
you will, you will take on board the changes to policy that they are needed because they have are in effect in line with the legislation. So, for example, there's a whole new section on enforcement and the reason that's there is because under the existing legislation we didn't have any enforcement powers to deal with pavement licensing. It literally was just you know, you couldn't do you couldn't really do anything, you would have had to go if you like, cap-in-hand, to Kent County Council as the highways authority, to beg them to do something about obstruction of the highway. So now that we've got enforcement powers, we've had to put them into the policy
I'm not saying I, like the enforcement powers I don't like the idea of that we'd have to cease furniture and store it and charge them, but that is the only enforcement powers we've been given, so we have to put that into policy it's not optional as to how we enforce its, it is literally lifted from the legislation and put in and we've used it as an opportunity just to tidy up some of the wording elsewhere so happy to take any questions on that.
I remember the second part of the Depot deals with the setting of the fees.
and following on from our debate on the last item, I will hope that you will see. I have attempted to put in some explanation as to what is making up those proposed fee Sophie on page 204 loss of the proposed fees there, I've I've put some sort of PR put forward as what we should be charging, because 100 pounds is not really covering our costs at all, but it's all we can charge at the present time and what I'm proposing is the sort of up to 1 year 280 pounds for a new licence and if it's up to two years which we don't really want to grant, but the facility is there in the legislation. So if there was a good reason to grant one for two years, we might do that and therefore the increases appropriate
it's all based around the cost of the processing of the application, the the in the amount of time needed to travel to site and then do compliance checking and things like that throughout a year plus there's got to be an element of covering the costs for me doing the policy me setting the fees and all the work that goes on in the background sort of speak of a settling-in or writing procedures reviewing procedures, reviewing this making the online form a bit better that kind of thing that all the things that you don't see going on in the background.
and that's what the costs are generally designed to cover, so I'm happy to take any questions on either the policy or the proposed fees.
thank you.
we have no British speakers on this item.
so do we have any questions for officers
sorry, there was one thing I meant to say and I got I got flustered, I really am sorry, I just want to acknowledge the amount of work that Sharon does yours. You will put into this because whilst it was my item and I did do the review of the policy and I put it around, my senior Licensing officers throughout the partnership Sharon was the only one who took the time to read all of my proposed amendments to policy and comment on them and then feedback, and I took on board a lot of what she did and all the others will I yeah, what Shannon said yeah agree with Sharon yeah, so I am really sorry Shankar's, I've just got myself it is, you know, all this
just forgotten to see it out, and needed to publicly thank her for all the work she has put into helping me with this and end all of the work she always does and stuff like this. So I just wanted to say that thank you
thank you,
Councillor Hayward, thank you very much Chair.
this question is possibly best for Helen, and it is about enforcement in that, as has been every thing we've looked at this evening in enforcement, the word May has always featured, and I wondered whether that was a legal requirement or whether.
will likely, or will you know it in terms of enforcement?
is that a legal requirement to use the word may?
well, I'm not quite sure she could elaborate what you mean by the question and then okay.
thank you, so I would need to check the wording in the levelling-up Regeneration Act, but, generally speaking, if it if it's a word, may it means the council has discretion as to whether in force or not the differences, if it said must, and there was a breach of the pavement licence policy, the Council would have to act, it would have to go and issue the notices, remove the furniture, if it says May and means the council has discretion as to whether or not they take the action and in what timescale they take. The action would have to check the actual wording of the act which I will do right now and if the accident says anything other than May I will come back to you. Thank you very much
thank you.
any other questions, Councillor Councillor Whetstone.
we are excited by new powers to enforce pavements and coming to us.
why why the stress on 12 months for a pavement licence, because he emerged as are in the policy they usually gross for 12 months, and I think he mentioned?
yeah, the Eileen, et cetera, and circumstances would we grant one for longer, what why is that?
so when the legislation first came in, it came in roughly, I think, as I said briefly, I think it was the 18th of July 2020 as part of the business and planning act, and if you remember back then during COVID the law was changing fast and loose quite quite a lot of it felt, like every other week we were getting different regulations about this that and the other however in relation to pavement licensing, which is what that was was basically transferring.
it was bringing in a fast-track process to do with pavement licences, basically taking it away from the Highways Authority in order to make it easier for the hospitality trade when they were not allowed to serve indoors, but to serve outdoors to basically make it easier and faster for them to be able to do that. So I understand why they did it and then what they did was she said that happened until July 2020 and they had an expiry date on the regulation of 30th of September, the following year, and then they extended it, so we've only ever been able to grant those licences for a year or just offer a year in the very first one. So we like the idea of continuing that, put that practice of only ever granting them for a year so that we can review, especially with the streetscape whether or not anything has changed
so that's why we we keep them it in policy that will only grant them for a year normally, but that you know because they've put it into the the legislation now that there can be granted for up to two years that, whilst we were acknowledging that that could be granted for two years but we want that to be exceptional and not the rule because I think it's important for I mean,
I come from a place where they were doing them every six months up in central London, you know then, constantly reviewing and they only ever got on like a one year planning permission in that kind of thing because they needed to review every year that's something is not changing on the 6th streetscape whether it be works being done, whether it been suddenly pedestrianised where it wasn't pedestrian has suddenly that pavement is gonna be widened or whatever, so that's why I've gone down that route is kicking. It is a year unless it's exceptional book but proposing a fee for a CDO just in case we we do want to do with TV I won because
it might get to the point where we've got a very well established area, pedestrianised area or whatever, and you know the licensed year on year, and we think actually you know what that one could go for two years now. We're confident that nothing's going to change the comparison to a newer one, for example, so that's why I've allowed it for worded it, I will have thank you. I think that's what I was giving out with so value for money aspect. I was gonna, save the Panthers, an example, but I've probably weren't Siracusa and I that's been a bit interesting for them. Yeah
in terms of the that continuity that that does make sense, if it is established pedestrianised area, there wouldn't have to revisit every every year.
thank you any further questions.
she ought to remember discussion in.
anybody who wished to discuss this.
OK, in which case we go to the recommendation, so the recommendation is as well said earlier, which we got an e-mail for, and so is not what is shown in the papers, it is that the committee considers the proposed patent licensing policy drafted to take into account the recent changes to registration and adopted to take upon commencement of schedule 22 of the levelling up and Regeneration Act 2023 the draft policy is attached.
as Appendix A and 2, as shown in our papers.
to approve the proposed fees for LA for applications set out in Appendix B to take effect upon commencement of scheduled 22 of the levelling up and Regeneration Act 2023, or we agreed agreed.
in keeping with the motion, was carried.
9 Urgent Business
10 Date of Next Meeting
agenda item 9 is urgent business and I can confirm there is no such business agenda item 10 his day to the next meeting, and the next meeting is on Tuesday, the 19th March at 20.23.
2024, there should be sorry, yes.
we didn't pick that up, so sorry 2024, the meetings now closed, thank you for your attendance, thank you Chair, thank you.
- 1 Chairs Introduction, opens in new tab
- 2 Apologies for Absence, opens in new tab
- 3 Declarations of Interest, opens in new tab
- 4 Notification of Persons Registered to Speak, opens in new tab
- Minutes , 12/09/2023 Licensing Committee, opens in new tab
- Draft consultation responses report_2023_2028 HC_PH Policy, opens in new tab
- Appendix A Draft Accessible HC and PH Licensing Policy 2023_2028 v1, opens in new tab
- Appendix B Taxi consultation table of responses, opens in new tab
- Appendix C Taxi Consultation 2023, opens in new tab
- Appendix D _ Response Mr Baraki, opens in new tab
- 05.11.2023 Final Report accessible version HCPH Licensing Fees and Charges 2024_2025, opens in new tab
- Appendix A Taxi Accounts inc 2023 24, opens in new tab
- Appendix B _ Fees and Charges 2024-25, opens in new tab
- Final Report accessible HW version Licensing Fees and Charges 2024_2025, opens in new tab
- Appendix A, opens in new tab
- Appendix B, opens in new tab
- Appendix C, opens in new tab
- Appendix D, opens in new tab
- pavement licensing report, opens in new tab
- Appendix A Pavement Licensing Policy 23 working draft, opens in new tab
- APPENDIX B PAVEMENT LIC, opens in new tab
- 7 Urgent Business, opens in new tab
- 8 Date of the Next Meeting, opens in new tab