Licensing Committee - 20/04/2009

At a MEETING of the LICENSING COMMITTEE held at Dundee on 20th April, 2009.

Present:-

COUNCILLORS

Bailie Roderick A J WALLACE, Convener, in the Chair.

The minute of meeting of this Committee of 2nd April, 2009 was held as read.

Unless marked thus * all items stand delegated.

I IMPROVING ACCESS TO TAXIS - CONSULTATION

Reference was made to Article III(h) of the minute of meeting of the Licensing Committee held on 2nd April, 2009, wherein it was explained that a draft response to the above Department for Transport consultation was to be submitted for approval to a special meeting of the Committee prior to the deadline for responses of 24th April, 2009.

A copy of the consultation document and the draft response were attached to the report as Appendices 1 and 2. The Committee agreed:-

(i) to note the content of the consultation document; and

(ii) to approve the response which is attached to this minute as Appendix I, subject to an amendment to response to question 19 to read as follows:-

the references to 0-3 years, 4-7 years and greater than 7 years in the first sentence thereof be replaced by 0-5 years, 5-8 years and greater than 8 years respectively.

II HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION - MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

There was submitted Agenda Note AN99-2009 reporting that there have been a number of applications for HMO licences where concerns have been raised about the arrangements for management of the premises, particularly where the applicants intended to manage the premises themselves with no involvement from professional management companies.

In order to assist applicants in this regard and also to seek to ensure that premises were managed to the standards sought by the Committee, it was recommended that formal management standards be adopted by the Committee as appended to the note and that these be included in the assessment process for each application received after the date of this meeting. Assuming all of the issues contained in the standards were satisfied by the applicants for licences, this would be confirmed to the Committee by the Private Sector Services Unit (PSSU) when the application was before it for consideration. Any issues remaining outstanding at that point would be the subject of enquiry of the applicants by the Committee. This would both enable applicants to know in advance of the standards the Committee expected and also cut down on the amount of enquiry needed at meetings.

The Committee agreed:-

(i) to the adoption of formal management standards as attached to this minute as Appendix II; and

(ii) that the Standard Conditions of HMO licences be amended to incorporate changes to reflect the requirements of the standards, as follows:-

(a) Standard Condition 3 (notice to neighbouring occupiers) be amended by deleting the reference to notifying occupiers of premises in the same building and of adjoining premises with a common wall and substituting therefor a requirement to notify all occupiers of properties sharing a common boundary with the application premises.

(b) A new Standard Condition 31 be added to the effect that the premises shall be managed by the applicant or appointed agent in accordance with the approved Dundee City Council HMO Management Standards and that this shall include the requirement to provide the tenants with a "Tenant Information Schedule" containing the prescribed information.

(iii) that these amendments to the conditions apply to all licences granted after 20th April, 2009 and that they be attached to existing licences upon renewal; and

(iv) that the management standards be applied to all applications received after 28th May, 2009.

Roderick A J WALLACE, Convener.

APPENDIX I

CONSULTATION ON IMPROVING ACCESS TO TAXIS

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DfT)

RESPONSE BY DUNDEE CITY COUNCIL

The Council welcomes this long-awaited national consultation on a subject which has become the most important policy issue facing taxi licensing authorities. At a local level, the Council commissioned its own consultation at the suggestion of its Taxi Liaison Group in 2008 prior to the announcement by the DfT that it would be issuing this document. It was decided that the local consultation be placed in abeyance pending the outcome of the national consultation. The Council's specific responses to the numbered questions posed in the DfT document are as follows:-

1 What is your view of the analysis and data included in [Section 2 of the document] and in the Impact Assessment? Do you have any further or more accurate data that you would be able to send us?

Paragraph 2.4 sets out the legislative powers available in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) and, in particular, Sections 32-35. However, with the exception of Section 33, these provisions have no application to Scotland, since they refer to a "regulated taxi" and "taxi" in terms of vehicles licensed under either the Town Police Clauses Act 1837 or the Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869, both of which statutes do not apply in Scotland. Taxi licensing in Scotland is regulated under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 ("the 1982 Act"). This also applies to Section 36 of the DDA which refers to the driver of a "regulated taxi" in the same way as Sections 32-35. The Council would assume that if there are any proposals to introduce all-accessible taxi fleets and duties upon drivers of such vehicles in Scotland that this would be done by regulations under Section 39 of the DDA (and Section 20(2A) of the 1982 Act). Other than these technical comments, the Council would agree with the analysis contained in the parts of the document referred to in the question and with the stated desire to improving access to taxis for people with disabilities.

2 What do you think are the potential impacts, costs and benefits of the "do nothing" scenario?

The Council can see no benefits in this approach whatsoever. In the absence of some kind of national regulation, each local authority will be left to continue as they are at the moment. Even a policy such as the one the Council operates, ie that any new applicants must place an accessible vehicle on service, will only lead to a very gradual increase in the numbers of accessible vehicles. It has taken five and a half years to get even one-third of the fleet to be accessible in Dundee following the introduction of that policy. Two-thirds of the fleet currently remain as saloon cars and this would only be substantially reduced or removed in the absence of regulation by either natural wastage or the adoption of a 100% accessible policy by the Council. The latter option would itself likely be challenged in the courts unless it was underpinned by national legislation. Even as things stand now, the operators of accessible vehicles are justifiably aggrieved at having to place more expensive cars on the road whilst the operators of saloon cars are able to make do with less expensive vehicles. Such a situation could itself be challenged as being unlawful and discriminatory. (In the 2008 decision of the Court of Session in the case of James Wilson -v- Aberdeen City Council, it was suggested that the way to eliminate the unfairness was to prescribe a date by which saloon car operators would have to convert to accessible vehicles). Under the DDA, licensing authorities as public bodies have a statutory duty to encourage the participation of disabled persons in public life, promote equality of opportunity between disabled persons and other persons, eliminate discrimination and promote positive attitudes towards disabled people. Doing nothing and leaving only one-third of the taxi fleet accessible would not be compatible with this duty. Another factor which has to be considered in the absence of regulation for a 100% accessible taxi fleet is the question of unmet demand. As you will be aware, licensing authorities have the power effectively to limit the number of taxis in their area if they are satisfied that there is no unmet demand. If such a limit is imposed where the taxi fleet is not 100% accessible, then the percentages of accessible to non-accessible vehicles are effectively "locked" and this is also surely incompatible with the duties on public bodies under the DDA outlined above. This would also exacerbate the cost differentials between those operating accessible vehicles as opposed to saloon car operators. Accordingly, demand limits and accessibility are totally at odds with each other in the absence of regulation.

3 Do you have any further or more accurate data on potential costs and benefits of a "do nothing" scenario you would be able to send us?

No.

4 What type of guidance would be most effective, in what format should it be produced and what can the DfT do to promote take-up?

If the ultimate outcome of the consultation is merely the production of guidance to licensing authorities, the Council fails to see how this will help the overall situation unless the guidance has some statutory foundation, eg that the guidance must legally be taken account of by licensing authorities in any decisions they make about granting Taxi Licences, failing which they have to explain why the guidance is not being followed. (This is similar to the status of ministerial guidance under the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005). Whilst some guidance would be better than the "do nothing" scenario, there is still the potential for the disadvantages of that scenario to remain unresolved. The Council is of the opinion that guidance would be a much less preferred alternative to specific mandatory regulations.

5 What do you think of the draft technical specification? Do you think that it would help improve levels of accessibility? Which aspects of it could be delivered easily and which ones would be problematic?

The Council welcomes the suggestion of the introduction of a national specification for accessible taxis. However, if this is introduced, it should be as part of a regulation and not merely as an advisory note, otherwise its effectiveness would be completely undermined. The draft initial specification seems to be envisaging a fleet made up of both wheelchair accessible vehicles and saloon cars adapted to meet the ambulatory accessibility standards. Is there not a danger that the greater cost of a wheelchair accessible vehicle could potentially lead to operators being attracted by the option of placing an adapted saloon car on service, thus leading to a possible scenario where there are no wheelchair accessible vehicles on service? Obviously, if and when there is a vehicle meeting the enhanced specification, this would not be a problem.

6 What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of DfT-funded demonstration schemes?

This would certainly be better than nothing in that it would at least provide some practical experience as to how effective or otherwise the proposed measures would be. Care would need to be taken in selecting the areas for such schemes in order to ensure sufficient geographical and demographical coverage to make them meaningful. It should be borne in mind that many areas, including this Council, already have mixed fleets and the implementation of the measures suggested in the consultation even on a demonstration basis will not address the fundamental problems associated with the continuance of what is perceived by sectors of the disabled community and accessible taxi operators as an unfair and discriminatory situation.

7 What do you think would be the most effective ways of influencing action by local licensing authorities, drivers and manufacturers?

The Council would support any means by which financial assistance can be given, either directly (eg some kind of grant) or indirectly (eg reduced VAT, fuel rebate similar to that given to bus operators) in order to help towards the cost of placing accessible vehicles on service. The issue of reduced licence fees may pose a problem given that licensing authorities in Scotland are under a legal duty to seek to recover the costs of the taxi licensing function under Section 12 of the 1982 Act.

8 What are your views on the Government's proposal to amend and commence Section 36? This would impose a duty on drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles that are designated as being wheelchair accessible to assist passengers in wheelchairs, to carry them in safety and comfort and to not charge them any extra. &

9 What additional enforcement action or tools would be the most effective ways of improving driver behaviour and attitudes?

Whilst there are undoubted attractions in introducing a statutory duty to give assistance in the circumstances outlined in the question, the Council would have concerns about the whole thing being undermined by widespread use of the exemption provisions which could see a number of drivers coming forward with medical certificates to get around having to offer any assistance to wheelchair passengers. The standard conditions of the Taxi Driver's Licences issued by the Council provide that the driver is to give such assistance to disabled passengers as he is able to give. Breach of a licence condition is an offence under Section 7(2) of the 1982 Act punishable by a fine up to level 3 on the standard scale. There is no provision for granting any exemption from this. Instead, the Council's Licensing Committee has to assess on a case-by-case basis where complaints are received as to whether the driver's medical condition (or any other reason) meant that he was not in a position to offer the assistance. It may be that in some cases there would be a degree of assistance the driver could offer notwithstanding his medical condition, in which scenario a refusal to offer any assistance would be a breach of the condition. Under Section 36, it appears to be envisaged that the driver would get an exemption from offering any assistance whatsoever. In common with many other licensing authorities, we receive many complaints from disabled passengers that drivers are giving them little or no assistance in such circumstances. (These comments about the effectiveness of commencing Section 36 are, of course, subject to our observations in response to Question 1 as to its non-applicability to Scotland as currently framed).

10 What measures do you think could act as positive incentives to improve driver behaviour and the levels of service offered to disabled people?

The Council would agree with the sentiments expressed on the subject of driver training and awareness. As mentioned above, the Council has received numerous complaints over the years concerning drivers of accessible (and non-accessible) vehicles and their behaviour and attitude towards disabled passengers. It is a condition of the Taxi Driver's licences issued by the Council that the driver has to undergo a disability awareness course approved by the Council. This was recently replaced by a more practical course organised and delivered by the Cabs Enforcement Unit of Tayside Police. Although intended to help primarily with wheelchair passengers, the Licensing Committee has decided that all taxi drivers in the City (whether or not they drive a wheelchair accessible vehicle) to undergo this training since there is no way of knowing that any particular driver will never be driving such a vehicle.

11 In relation to improving access to taxis, what do you think the DfT and local licensing authorities could do better or more effectively?

The Council agrees with the views expressed in the consultation document that there needs to be an awareness on the part of licensing authorities of the needs of their local community and for co-ordination of strategies with other departments of the local authority, particularly transportation. As stated in the preamble to this response, the Council welcomes the DfT issuing the consultation and looks forward to effective measures being taken by it in the field of access to taxis for disabled people.

12 How could we help to increase the availability of accessible taxis and private hire vehicles at ports, airports, bus and rail stations?

This could be achieved either through general regulation of the taxi/private hire fleet as a whole, or by specifically using the powers under Section 32 of the DDA (subject again to the earlier comments regarding the applicability of that section to Scotland).

13 How could we improve the consistency and quality of information provided to disabled people about taxis?

This is something which could best be achieved by issuing guidance, perhaps with the involvement of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights. The former Disability Rights Commission produced a number of excellent sector-specific guidance documents of this type. Licensing authorities could also look at developing information sources such as website pages and the issue of information direct to disabled groups containing contact details for operators with accessible vehicles.

14 What do you think are the potential impacts, costs and benefits of a pro-active programme of DfT led initiatives? &

15 Do you have any further or more accurate data on potential costs and benefits of a programme of DfT led initiatives that you would be able to send us?

Please see the responses to Questions 4-13 above.

16 What do you think about the draft technical specification?

Please see the answer to Question 5 above.

17 What do you think are the potential impacts, costs and benefits of a regulation?

The most obvious benefit of regulation is uniformity across the country and the removal of any uncertainty as to whether local authorities have the power to require the provision of accessible vehicles. The Council agrees wholeheartedly with the comments at Paragraph 2.43 that regulations proposing a mixed fleet are unworkable, totally impractical and susceptible to legal challenge. Equally, however, as stated in answer to Question 5, the content of the draft initial specification allows the possibility of the whole taxi fleet being adapted saloon cars rather than wheelchair accessible vehicles. The Council would stress once again its view of the benefit of introducing regulations to combat the potential difficulties which may be caused by the need for public bodies to comply with the DDA duties upon them and the not unrelated issue of areas where there are, or may be, limits on the numbers of taxis.

18 Do you have any further or more accurate data on potential costs and benefits of a regulation that you would be able to send us?

As mentioned in the preamble to this response, the Council undertook a consultation exercise at the local level in summer 2008. Although this tended to favour both the introduction of a limit and the maintenance of a mixed fleet, the respondents did not address the incompatibility of these measures with the achievement of greater accessibility to taxis for disabled people. Although there may not yet be one vehicle which is universally accessible to all types of disability, there are a range of vehicles at the moment which are classed as wheelchair accessible and this is recognised in the consultation document. There was also support for this in the local consultation responses.

19 How do you think a technical standard should be enforced?

In Dundee, the number of tests each vehicle is required to undergo each year is determined by the age of the vehicle - 0-5 years have to be tested annually; 5-8 years are tested twice annually; and > 8 years are subject to 3 tests annually. A similar type of age-based testing regime should be introduced nationally to ensure that accessible vehicles meet the required standards. The Council would reiterate its views expressed in Answer 5 that anything short of regulation in this area will undermine the imposition of the technical standard. Consideration should also be given to the introduction of a suitable transitional period, eg 10 years, for existing non-accessible vehicle operators to make the switch to accessible vehicles to comply with the technical standard.

APPENDIX II

DUNDEE CITY COUNCIL

MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

FOR HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION

1 Where the applicant for a licence is to be carrying out the day-to-day management of the premises through a professional management company, a copy of the contract to this effect shall be lodged with the Private Sector Services Unit (PSSU) prior to the application being considered by the Licensing Committee.

2 The applicant or management company shall submit to the PSSU a list of all contractors whom the applicant intends to instruct to carry out emergency repairs to ensure that the premises are safe, secure and habitable. This list shall include all services to the property such as heating, gas, electrical and plumbing work, glazing, security alarms, joinery and locksmiths. A pro forma list will be available from the PSSU.

3 The tenants of the premises will be supplied with a "Tenant Information Schedule" (a pro forma schedule is available from PSSU or on the Council website) containing the following details:-

- name and contact information of the applicant and/or managing agent, including both a landline telephone number and mobile details and also e-mail address where available;

- arrangements for contacting the applicant and/or managing agent in the event of either being unavailable due to illness, holidays, etc;

- contact information for Tayside Police, Tayside Fire and Rescue, Ninewells Hospital, NHS 24, PSSU, Dundee City Council Anti-Social Behaviour Team and Waste Management Department, and also the utilities (Gas, Water, Electricity);

- location and operation of all main switches and stopcocks;

- contact details for all suppliers of fuel to the premises;

- details of the operation of the fire alarm system at the premises;

- an emergency action plan for the premises in accordance with the Guidance issued by PSSU;

- copies of the HMO licence, Gas Safety Certificate (if applicable), buildings and contents insurance certificates, Periodic Inspection Report and Portable Appliance Test Certificate;

- Fire Precautions Logbook.

A copy of the schedule shall be lodged with PSSU prior to the application being considered by the Licensing Committee.

4 The applicant and/or managing agent shall ensure that there is full compliance with the requirement for weekly testing of the fire detection system at the premises. The applicant and/or managing agent is to make visits to the premises on at least a monthly basis in this regard and it is expected that applicants and/or managing agents will use this visit as an opportunity to confirm that the premises remain in a safe, secure and habitable condition.

5 The applicant will be responsible for notifying all neighbouring owners or occupiers of premises sharing a common boundary with the application premises in accordance with a condition to be attached to the HMO Licence to this effect. Such notification shall be in the form provided by PSSU upon the granting of the application.