Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support
Minutes:
The Chair invited the Applicant to speak in support of his application
APPLICANT
Mr McNeill said he was applying for a licence for a wheelchair accessible
taxi to help supplement the other taxis in the area. He advised that a few nursing homes had
contacted him about using his company as they were currently using a company
outwith 鶹Ѱ and Bute. He referred to
a letter from a nursing home which he said he had sent to the Licensing Team
this morning and had asked that this be passed onto the Committee. He referred to the distinction between a
private hire car and a taxi. He said
that as private hire cars could operate anywhere in 鶹Ѱ and Bute they may
not be available when required in the Helensburgh and Lomond area. He advised that he thought it best to have a
taxi car licence so that drivers could supplement their income with private
hires by being able to pick up fares on the street and alleviate pressure when
taxis where not available after midnight.
He said he hoped to help the nursing homes out and the various other
locations that required wheelchair accessible taxis.
QUESTIONS FROM OBJECTORS
Mr Romilly commented that he had one of the only wheelchair accessible
vehicles in the area. He said he did not
get a lot of work from the rank with the majority of customers pre booking for
a wheelchair accessible vehicle. He
asked Mr McNeill how many customers he expected to get as a taxi instead of a
private hire.
Mr McNeill explained that if this was private hire vehicle it could go
anywhere in 鶹Ѱ and Bute and if someone phoned up to request it, it may not
be available in the Helensburgh and Lomond area, where a taxi would only be
able to operate. He said a taxi could
not operate outside the zone it was licenced to unless, for example, it was
taking someone to hospital and bringing them back. If the vehicle was operated as a private hire
it could have a job in Campbeltown or Oban and so would not be available in the
Helensburgh and Lomond area.
Mr Romilly said he failed to see the difference as a taxi could also be
out of the area and if it was busy it would not be available either.
Mr McNeill said that with taxis, people could pick up these from the
street and with his advanced booking system coming along soon, he would be able
to allocate one of the licensed taxis to pick up the person in minutes. A private hire would have to be pre booked
and could not do normal street work and could be anywhere within 鶹Ѱ and
Bute. He said that was why he was
applying for taxi car licence. He also
commented that the number of taxis in the area had dropped since June this
year.
OBJECTORS
Mr Cowin
Mr Cowin advised that his objection had been submitted a few months
ago. He noted that there had been 52
taxi plates in the area but that had reduced to 47. He felt his objection no longer carried any
weight.
Mr Romilly
Mr Romilly said that he had noted the slight decrease in the number of
plates but advised that this did not change his view that Mr McNeill was an
unfit operator. He advised of having
many dealings with the Council and said that none of his issues raised had been
resolved. He referred to personal
attacks and said he felt Mr McNeill was an unfit operator within the town. He referred to Mr McNeill’s response to the
objections and said that he felt this was a personal attack on him by Mr
McNeill and that it had nothing to do with his plate or his business. He said this demonstrated that Mr McNeill was
an unfit character.
Mrs Romilly
Mrs Romilly advised that she echoed what Mr Romilly had said. She said that from her own experience Mr
McNeill was an unfit operator. She said
the statement he had submitted was a personal attack. She advised that there were a lot of false
complaints from Mr McNeill which they have always had to go back to legal about
and that they were always innocent. She
said there seemed to be a lot of false allegations and she could not understand
why this was the case. She said that
they had never submitted any false complaints to the Council about Mr
McNeill. She referred to complaints they
had put in which she alleged had not been resolved.
QUESTIONS FROM APPLICANT
Mr McNeill questioned why it was being said that he was an unfit
operator. He referred to the allegations
and said he did not know where they were coming from and that they were not
from him.
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS
Councillor Armour referred to Mr McNeill advising that he had submitted
a letter to legal that the Committee should have had sight of. He sought comment from Officers. Mrs Barton advised that a letter was
received. Ms Clanahan confirmed she
received a copy of the letter shortly before the hearing started and that she
was not aware if this had been distributed to the Committee.
Councillor Green sought and received confirmation from Ms Clanahan that
it would not be appropriate for the Committee to consider this letter at the
last moment as there had been no opportunity to review if before hand and there
was no opportunity for the Objectors to consider it. She advised that it was a general letter from
a care home and referred to some sort of gap in wheelchair provision in the
area. She reiterated that as it was sent
in so late that it would not be appropriate to include it today.
Councillor Green noted that it was a general statement made about
demand which had also been made by Mr McNeill in his representation to the
Committee.
SUMMING UP
Objectors
Mr Cowin
Mr Cowin advised that he had nothing further to add.
Mr Romilly
Mr Romilly referred to a previous meeting held in June and said that
there were a number of issues that needed to be looked at for the future. He referred to asking for help from the
Council’s licensing team. He said that
they were only made aware of allegations made after they were submitted. He referred to a letter which had been
submitted about an incident he said took place at Tescos, and said this had
still to be resolved. He said he did not
believe there was any issue with wheelchair accessible taxis at the moment.
Mrs Romilly
Mrs Romilly acknowledged that there were 47 taxi plates at the moment
for the Helensburgh and Lomond area. She
referred to a letter she had received from the Council’s Roads Officer that the
Council would be looking to re-determine the front taxi rank. She said that if they did this there would be
no space for more taxis at the rank. She
said she understood that the Council were looking to remove the front taxi rank
to make more room for disabled parking spaces.
She said that if this rank was taken away it would only leave one in the
town of Helensburgh.
Mrs Romilly referred to approaching the Council many times for
help. She said that they had never made
false allegations about Mr McNeill but he had done this to them. She said the Council’s legal team had all the
information. She said they had been
asking for help for 2 years now. She
asked the Committee to consider this.
She said she believed Mr McNeill was an unfit operator.
Applicant
Mr McNeill referred to Mrs Romilly’s comments about the taxi rank. He advised that the Helensburgh and Lomond
zone covered around 20 miles and said that he was aware of locations at the top
of Loch Lomond where people could not get a general taxi so needed to use
private hire vehicles. He said that he
was aware that Mr Romilly was granted a taxi licence for that area but advised
that he has had phone calls from people not able to get a taxi in that
area. He advised that if he got this
licence he would be happy to have taxis located across the Helensburgh and
Lomond zone. He said he would prioritise
any bookings for wheelchair accessible taxis made online or by telephone. He said he would liaise with the nursing
homes and other establishments so that they could contact his company if they
required a taxi immediately. He said
that if this licence was granted he would be able to supply a service on
demand.
When asked, all parties confirmed that they had received a fair
hearing.
DEBATE
Councillor Brown asked if there was the capacity within Helensburgh and
Lomond at the present time to allow for another licence to be granted. Ms
Clanahan confirmed that there were currently 47 taxi licences in the
Helensburgh and Lomond area. She said
this was one less that September last year and one less than that referenced in
the LVSA report. In terms of private
hire vehicles, there were 13 with addresses within the Helensburgh and Lomond
area. She pointed out that as these
were not zoned to a particular area it was difficult to know how many of these
operated within Helensburgh and Lomond.
She also advised that 4 of the private hire licences and 4 of the taxi
car licences were for wheelchair accessible vehicles.
Councillor Green advised that he had difficulty in finding any reason
to refuse this licence and on that basis he was minded to approve application.
Councillor Armour said he agreed that he found this difficult. He commented that he thought there were a lot
of underlying issues between the Applicant and Objectors. He said he had no idea what was correct and
what was not. He said the Committee had
to take the application at face value and that Councillor Green had summed it
up that there was nothing in the application that the Committee could go
against.
Councillor Green commented that it came down to “he said” “she said”.
Councillor McCabe sought and received confirmation from Ms Clanahan
that this vehicle was insured.
DECISION
The Committee agreed to grant a Taxi Car Licence to Glasgow Coach
Drivers Limited for a Mercedes Vito registration number LA11 EOU and noted that
Mr McNeill would be notified of this in writing within 7 days.
(Reference: Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support, submitted)