NOT FOR PUBLICATION

North Yorkshire County Council

Executive

21 March 2023

Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Section 65 – North Yorkshire Hackney Carriage Maximum Fares

Report of the Corporate Director – Business and Environmental Services

1.0 Purpose of Report

1.1 The purpose of this report is to set harmonised maximum Hackney Carriage (HC) fares for the whole of North Yorkshire.

2.0 Background

2.1 On 21 February 2023, the North Yorkshire Council Executive, resolved to adopt a HC and Private Hire (PH) taxi licensing policy that is intended to cover the whole of North Yorkshire, following public consultation. Additionally, the Executive resolved to adopt part two of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (other than section 45). The adoption of the Act creates one ‘controlled district’ to reflect the administrative area of North Yorkshire Council from 1 April 2023.

2.2 The creation of the North Yorkshire Council will bring together seven licensing authorities. Each legacy authority currently has their own maximum HC fare, detailed at Appendix A.

2.3 As part of the LGR process, officers carried out a risk assessment that showed that the following risk factors if the Council was not to introduce one maximum HC fare from 1 April 2023. The risks were as follows:

i. Complaints from drivers aggrieved by current different maximum fares than their colleagues in neighbouring areas in North Yorkshire.

ii. Complaints from customers confused by the various fares in areas licensed by the one Authority.

iii. Additional resources required to consider any subsequent fare increases (i.e. up to seven separate consultations, executive meetings, newspaper advertisements etc).

2.4 Section 65 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (“the Act”) provides that the Council may fix the maximum rate of fares for the whole of North Yorkshire and all other charges in connection with the hire of a HC vehicle; this is done by means of a table which is referred to as “the table of fares”. Fares for Private Hire (PH) vehicles cannot be controlled by the Council. They can set their own fares and are therefore not the subject of this report. Importantly, this allows the HC trade to levy lower fares but not to exceed a maximum fare set by the Council. Thus, it provides greater charging flexibility for the trade whilst setting a ceiling on charges for customers, some of which are isolated by geography, income or mobility.

2.5 Where fares are set by the local authority, drivers of HC vehicles cannot charge more to passengers than the fare specified on the meter apart from in certain exceptional

circumstances, although they can charge less.

2.6 On 24 January 2023, the Executive proposed a maximum taxi fare for the North Yorkshire Hackney Carriage trade from 1 April 2023. The proposal was a combination of existing Hackney Carriage (“HC”) Fares in Scarborough Harrogate and Selby which represented the highest in North Yorkshire. The proposals give all legacy areas an increase.

2.7 These proposed fares are shown in Appendix B and were subsequently published in the Yorkshire Post on 6 February 2023 (a legal requirement) and published on each of the seven districts and North Yorkshire County Council’s notice boards and emailed to the taxi trade. The public consultation was carried out between 6 and 20 February 2023.

2.8 The Licensing Member Working Group considered the proposals and objections on 28 February. Their recommendations are contained in Appendix C of this report.

2.9 The table of fares must come into operation by 24 April 2023, ie no later than two months after the last date for making representations (20 February 2023), with or without modification. Officers have recommended an implementation date of 3 April 2023 to avoid the potential risks as shown in section 2.4 of the report.

3.0 Responses received

3.1 In total 29 responses were received to the public consultation, with 28 raising specific objections and one in support.

3.2 Appendix D shows a summary of the responses received with officer comments and Appendix E shows the full consultation responses.

4.0 Analysis of responses and options

4.1 The draft HC fare proposal was based on the current HC fare for Scarborough, Harrogate and Selby. Increases were made only to the tariff one the initial flag fall from £3.60 to £4.00, the soiling charge from £80 to £100, the date change for the Christmas period from 1800 hours on 24 December to 0600 hours on 27 December, rather than until 26 December and an increase on vehicles carrying five or more passengers from 50p per head to £1.00 per head. If the Executive approves the HC fare proposal in Appendix B, there will be an increase in the maximum HC fare in all North Yorkshire areas.

4.1.1 Analysis of the responses made in consultation is contained in Appendix D.

4.2 The Executive have the following options:

· Not to set new fares for North Yorkshire. This is not recommended for the reasons outlined in 2.3 above;

· To set new fares for North Yorkshire as originally advertised in Appendix B. This is not recommended as it takes no account of consultation responses;

· To set new fares for North Yorkshire modified as recommended by the Licensing Working Members Group in Appendix C. This is the option recommended by officers;

· To set new fares for North Yorkshire modified in any other way. This is not recommended as it does implement the recommendations of the Licensing Members Working Group.

5.0 Policy Implications

5.1 None identified. These proposals are in line with other policy changes as detailed in this report.

6.0 Financial Implications

6.1 This will have no direct financial impact on the Council budgets, but if the fares are set too low, operators could cease to trade, and the Council’s Hackney Carriage fee income would be reduced. To set them too high could impact on the ability of customers to travel, some of which are isolated by geography, income or mobility.

7.0 Legal Implications

7.1 Section 65 requires a Notice setting out the variation to the fares to be published in at least one local newspaper and to specify a period of at least 14 days from the date of publication within which objections against the proposal must be lodged (“the objection period”). A copy of this notice must also be available, free of charge at the Council’s offices for inspection at all reasonable hours for the same length of period. This requirement has been complied with.

7.2 The Council must now consider the objections and decide if any modifications should be made to the table of fares. After consideration of the objections, the Council must set a further date, that is no more than two months after the expiration of the objection period, for when the variation to the fares (with or without modification) will come into force (as detailed in paragraph 2.9 above).

8.0 Equalities Implications

8.1 An Equality Impact Assessment has been carried out as part of this process. This can be seen at Appendix F.

9.0 Climate Implications

9.1 None have been identified.

10.0 Reasons for Recommendations

10.1 Deciding not to create new maximum fares for North Yorkshire is likely to lead to complaints from drivers aggrieved by current different maximum fares than their colleagues in neighbouring areas in North Yorkshire. It would generate complaints from customers confused by the various maximum fares in areas licensed by the one Authority. It would also require additional resources to consider any subsequent fare increases (ie up to seven separate consultations, executive meetings, newspaper advertisements etc.).

10.2 Setting new maximum fares for North Yorkshire provides greater charging flexibility for the trade whilst setting a ceiling on charges for customers, some of which are isolated by geography, income or mobility.

10.3 The recommendations are based on consultation responses and the recommendations of the Licensing Member Working Group.

11.0 Recommendations

12.1 The Executive is asked to:

i. Consider the objections to the advertised proposed table of fares (Appendix D);

ii. Approve the recommended modifications to the table of fares made by the Licensing Member Working Group (Appendix C);

iii. Confirm a date of 3 April 2023 for the new table of fares to come into effect.

KARL BATTERSBY

Corporate Director - Business and Environmental Services

Report Authors: Sharon Cousins, Gareth Bentley

Presenter of Report – Sharon Cousins

Background Documents: None

Appendices:

Appendix A – Legacy Authority Maximum Hackney Carriage Fares

Appendix B – Proposed maximum taxi fares for the North Yorkshire Hackney Carriage trade from 1 April 2023

Appendix C – Licensing Member Working Group Recommendations

Appendix D – Summary of consultation responses with officer comments

Appendix E – Full Consultation Responses

Appendix F – Equality Impact Assessment

RICHMONDSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1976

HACKNEY CARRIAGE FARES

From Nov 2022

TARIFF 1 - up to 4 passengers - From 06.00h until 23.00h except that date and time covered by Tariff 3 and 4
For each journey not exceeding ½ mile, or part thereof	£2.80
For each subsequent 1/10 of a mile or part thereof	£0.24
Waiting time for each period of 1 minute or part thereof	£0.22
TARIFF 2 - 5 or more passengers - From 06.00h until 23.00h except that date and time covered by Tariff 5 and 6
For each journey not exceeding ½ mile, or part thereof	£4.50
For each subsequent 1/10 of a mile or part thereof	£0.35
Waiting time for each period of 1 minute or part thereof	£0.33
TARIFF 3 - up to 4 passengers
For hirings begun between 23.00h and 07.00h on any day except, Christmas Eve, and New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day	Tariff 1 plus 50%
TARIFF 4 - up to 4 passengers
For hirings begun between 18.00h Christmas Eve to 07.00h on 27 December and 20.00h on 31 December to midnight on 1 January	Tariff 1 plus 100%
TARIFF 5 - 5 or more passengers-
For hirings begun between 23.00h and 07.00h on any day except, Christmas Eve, and New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day	Tariff 2 plus 50%
TARIFF 6 - 5 or more passengers-
For hirings begun between 18.00h Christmas Eve to 07.00h on 27 December and 20.00h on 31 December to midnight on 1 January	Tariff 2 plus 100%
Soiling charge [maximum charge]	£100
A booking fee up to a maximum of £4.00 charged where: a) The Hackney carriage is booked in advance, and b) I. The Customer shall be told the cost of the booking fee at the time that the booking is taken, and the amount recorded in the booking log; and II. The customer shall be told that the booking fee is in addition to the fare for the journey. and c) The hiring involves a separate journey of at least one mile, starting from the taxi rank or the Operator’s premises to the pick-up point.

Graphical user interface, text, application Description automatically generated

Graphical user interface, text, application, Word Description automatically generated

Summary of consultation responses to the NY Maximum HC fare and officer comments

Summary of Consultation Response	Officer Comments
The fare proposal is too high, especially in rural areas where travel distances are likely to be higher.	Drivers would be legally able to charge under the maximum meter rate. There is no requirement to charge the maximum fare. Many of the responses highlight increasing costs for drivers and an inability to make a living. In setting the fares an increase was built in which equated to the most expensive current rates in North Yorkshire. This was a combination of the current Scarborough and Harrogate fares. It is ultimately a business decision by the operator on what fare to charge. This could result in competition which in time should push down the fares charged.
Because they are much higher than previous in some areas, different companies and drivers will charge different rates in rural areas.	The proposals are maximum fares, not mandatory fares and drivers, at their discretion, charge a lower rate than the maximum fare. Market forces are likely to come into play and result in competitive rates of fare which would benefit the customer.
That the fare proposal is too low.	The Council needs to seek a balance between ensuring drivers are fairly rewarded for their work and ensuring that members of the public are not deterred from using hackney carriages in the area. It is accepted that as part of the consultation process that the Council will receive differing views.
Flag fall should be higher. Up to £5 is suggested.	See above for comments on the fare proposal being to low.
Flag fall should be lower. Down to £3 is suggested.	See above for comments on the fare proposal being to high.
Flag fall should be single time for Tariff 1, time and half for Tariff 2 and double time for Tariff 3.	This was considered by the LMWG and the recommendation of the group can be seen in Appendix C.
Fares are being decreased as proposed.	This is not the case. The proposed fares are same as or higher than all current fares in North Yorkshire. See comments above for flag fall being to low
The fares are confusing with fares being set in yards and not miles.	This is to reflect how meters add 20p “drops” at specific intervals and not in whole miles. A rate per mile can be given for each of the tariffs if requested.
There should be a higher tariff for minibuses with up to 8 seats.	This was considered by the LMWG and the recommendation of the group can be seen in Appendix C.
Carrying 5 people or more tariff is too low. The proposal of an extra £1 per head above for 4 passengers is not enough. It is suggested that minibuses get a 50% increase on all tariff bands.	This was considered by the LMWG and the recommendation of the group can be seen in Appendix C.
Tariff 2 starting at midnight is too late, as smaller towns nights out finish earlier. Comments suggests various start times for tariff 2 from 7pm to 11pm.	This was considered by the LMWG and the recommendation of the group can be seen in Appendix C.
The 20p increment for every 167.67 yards or part thereof is too small.	This was considered by the LMWG. After a discussion on the matter the group agreed that there should be no amendment to the 20p increment or a reduction in the yardage. The LMWG agreed that changing the structure of how the fare charges work was not the right thing to do when the flag fall was increasing
A £2 surcharge for per animal carried (other than assistance animals) was requested.	This has only been requested by one respondent and is not charged by any of the North Yorkshire authorities currently.
Concern has been expressed that all vehicle meters will need recalibrating with the new tariffs.	Vehicles will need to calibrate if they want to use the new maximum fares. All vehicles must be set to the same number of a tariffs as the maximum fare has. In this case 3. Some current districts have more.
There was one response in support of the proposed fares.

Consultation Responses received

Response 1. Hello there, i m a hackney carriage and private hire combined driver from Richmondshire. I would like to object to proposed taxi fare tariff due to the following factors:

1: Richmondshire is a big area with small towns and villages where people travel to very nearby places, so charging people £4.00 for a quarter of a mile is too much. The council has recently increased taxi fares to £2.80 for half of a mile so increasing the fare again would put negative impact on the use of the taxis as people here live nearby and use taxis for much shorter distances.

2: for shorter journeys the fare is too expensive but the increment of £0.20 for every 167.62yards proposed is also not suitable and would put negative impact on the taxi driving which will lead to refusal of long journeys and will put people in difficult situation.

I would like to suggest that the starting fare of £4.00 for quarter of a mile should be dropped to £2.80 and the increment of £0.20 for 167.62yards should be increased to £0.25 for a single tariff.

For the the second tariff the starting time should be dropped to 22:00 or 23:00 instead of midnight, starting fare should be £4.20(50% on top tariff 1) and increment of £0.35 for 167.62yards.

I hope above suggestions would be considered for the best of both, people and the taxi trade.

Response 2. I’ve driven a taxi in Rydale for 15 years.
I would firstly like to oppose the new flag fall which has risen from £3.30 to £4, but also has a decrease in mileage from half a mile to a quarter of a mile. While the running mile stays unaltered.
This will put around a £1 a mile on every local journey which will hit the most vulnerable of our community that regularly use taxis for their local shopping and surgery visits. So let’s say Mrs Smith has to go to the surgery four times a week for her bandages changing she will now incur an £8 a week rise in her taxis while the local business man who has a taxi to Manchester airport only has a £1 increase on his 150 mile round trip journey.
I think this is massively unfair and hitting the wrong people in the wrong way who are already struggling with the cost of living.
I would suggest a rise on the running mile and no change to the flag fall is a much fairer increase that will see customers pay approximately for the time and distance that they travel.
I would also like to oppose the 12pmthreshold for tariff 2 and ask that it stay at 9pm as it was on the last RDC carriage fares or at bare minimum move back to 11pm as it was in previous years.
I look forward to your thoughts on my opposition to the new tariff rises

Response 3. I request you increase the start from £4.00 to £4.50 and increase £0.20 to £0.40 440 yards to 370 Also increase tariff 2 from £5.40 to £ 5.80 change the timing from 12.00am to 11pm as there has been a decline in footfall from the taxi trade due to pandemic and increase in shops, nightlife closing down dramatically this has affected us Increase in petrol, insurance, maintained of vehicle increase in council fee, mot and purchasing of a new vehicle we need a big increase in fares Thank you

Response 4. just wanted to say fair for 5a more people is not there I work as Taxi driver in craven DC we have 5peple tarfe so why can't

Response 5. Hi, I have looked at the proposed table of fares for hackney carriages and I found it to be rather confusing. The current table of fares for hambleton district hackney carriages are set out by the mile and not in yards. The current fares are straight forward and it is fairly simple to work out a price for a customer before the journey but working out a price with the new proposed table of fares is almost impossible for some drivers. If you could revise the table of fares and put it in miles for example £5 for the first mile and £0.20 for every 1/10 of a mile after would be much more convenient for myself and many other drivers.

Response 6. Thanks for your email regarding the table of fares.

We have the following concerns about the proposed tariff

-Proposed Tariff is good for small councils where jobs are with in 4 to 5 miles but it does not suit big councils like Hambleton District, Ryedale and Richmondshire. Its working out £2.10/miles after first 0.25 mile while our tariff in Richmondshire is £2.40/mile- Tariff 2 is the time and half of the tariff 1 which is good but the only trouble is, it starts at midnight which is too late. In Richmond night out finishes by 1am. Current tariff 2 in Richmondshire starts at 11pm which means drivers get chance to work on tariff 2 for couple of hours and if it will start at midnight they would not stay back to wait for tariff 2 and it will create a massive gap in demand and supply. which means more troubles and fights will be happening in the town.- Minibuses and MPVs has been neglected in the proposed tariff. One pound extra charge per head does not justify for minibus drivers. On current tariff we charge about £40 from Catterick to Darlington for 4 seater and about £60 for 8 seater. According to new tariff if its £40 for the car and it will be £44 for the minibus which doesn't make sense. Minibuses should be time and half of the car tariff. If you wouldn't make the separate tariff for the minibuses, after couple of years you wouldn't be able to find any minibus in the whole county council. Nobody will be willing to invest 30 to 40k on minibuses just to make the same amount of money like a normal car.

Response 7. As a Hackney Carriage driver operating in Richmondshire, I'd like to object to the proposed fares as outlined in the recent email.

The £4 flag fall for the first 440 yards is too big an increase from the £2.80 that has only recently been applied. I believe it will deter customers using taxis for shorter distances.

The £0.20 increment for every 167.62 yards or part thereof, is too small, in my opinion, especially if we lose custom, due to the increased flag drop.

I'd propose a £3 flag drop, to encourage customers to use taxis and a £0.25 increment for every 167.62 yards or part thereof. Using this example, I think, will be fairer for the customers and better for the taxi trade.

The proposed tariffs for mini buses does not encourage owners/drivers to use these vehicles as taxis, especially as most of these are adapted for wheelchairs which incurs additional costs,

Response 8. Hiking the renewal of licence fees and dropping the price of fares in the current economic climate seems to me to be an act of madness.

Drivers didn't have a rise since 2013. The price of literally everything has sky rocketed this last decade.

I have enjoyed driving in the Hambleton District for ten years but am now tempted by the districts of North Yorkshires less wealthy neighbourhoods whom local councils have considered the livelihoods of the good people working within the taxi industry.

Response 9. As a Hackney Carriage driver operating in Richmondshire, I'd like to object to the proposed fares as outlined in the recent email.

The £4 flag fall for the first 440 yards is too big an increase from the £2.80 that has only recently been applied. | believe it will deter customers using taxis for shorter distances.

The £0.20 increment for every 167.62 yards or part thereof, is too small, in my opinion, especially if we lose custom, due to the increased flag drop.

I'd propose a £3 flag drop, to encourage customers to use taxis and a £0.25 increment for every 167.62 yards or part thereof. Using this example, | think, will be fairer for the customers and better for the taxi trade.

The proposed tariffs for mini buses does not encourage owners/drivers to use these vehicles as taxis, especially as most of these are adapted for wheelchairs which incurs additional costs.

Response 10. With reference to the recent email regarding the proposed new tariffs for Taxi’s, I would like to strongly object to your proposal.

The £4 flag fall for the first 440 yards I feel is too high an increase, after the recent increase to £2:80. I feel this would deter customers from using Taxi’s for shorter distances.

The 20p increment for every 167.62 yards, or part thereof, I feel is too low, in my opinion, especially if we do lose customers, due to the increased flag drop.

I would propose a £3 Flag drop, to encourage customers to keep using taxis, and a 25p increment for every 167.62 yards or part thereof. Using this proposal, I believe will be fairer for the customer, and better for the taxi trade.

I would also suggest keeping the nigh time rate between 23:00 and 7:00, making it worth the drivers being out at night time. If you change to midnight, (In Richmond most places close by 01:00), so the drivers would only benefit the increased rate for one hour. I would guess drivers would not be so keen to stay out late for only 1 hour of night time rate, considering there is often a lot of bother late in the night.

As a minibus owner, the proposed tariffs for minibuses do not encourage owner/drivers to utilise their vehicles as taxis, as they would be losing out big time on the proposed tariffs. An example of this is a car travelling from Vimy Barracks to Darlington, the car rate would be about £40, a full minibus, (eg mine as an 8 seater), would bring in an extra £4 only!!! It is not worth me having a minibus with all the extra costs incurred for a measly £4. I believe no one would want to own minibuses, therefore taxi drivers would probably not keep them, why spend 30k-40k for no increased income- minibuses cost more to maintain so they would most likely change to cars. This would then impact on the customers, as 8 people would need to hire 2 cars, at a cost of £80, instead of a minibus at £60.

You also need to be aware that in the Richmondshire area, the majority of wheelchair accessible vehicles are minibuses, therefore the vulnerable people would suffer due to lack of vehicles.

I propose a minibus tariff of Tariff 1 plus 50% - £4.50 flag fall, then 33p thereafter, then after 23:00, a 50% increase on the above

Response 11. I would like to object to the proposed hackney carriage fares on the grounds of equality.

You have proposed an increase of 40p on the flag fall for tariff 1, but no increase for tariff 2.

May I point out to you that generally speaking we have two types of drivers - day and night. The night drivers who charge tariff 2 after midnight have been allowed to charge time and a half for the following reasons -

1. Unsocial hours

2. Sometimes (most times) dealing with the dregs of humanity - drug users, drunks etc. and the related abuse that goes along with this.

3. The numbers of times that they don't get paid (runners)

4. Being drawn into the darker side of life

5. Being part of the night-time economy

6. They are an invaluable asset to the police - getting people off the streets quickly.

There are many drivers who, no matter how much you paid them, would no work nights. The proposed tariff 2 does not equate to time and a half as previously tariff 2 has done. The proposed 40p awarded to day drivers on tariff 1 presumably is to offset rising costs. Those costs also affect night drivers.

On 1st April 2023, the national minimum wage goes up by just short of £1 per hour. The 40p increase does not come anywhere near to matching this.

I respectfully request that you reconsider tariff 2 and increase the flag fall to £6, which equates to time and a half in line with the running mile. The proposed taxi fares that are due to come in on 1st April, could you please confirm that the flagfall on tariff 2 at £5.40 is correct, or has an error been made?

Response 12. I think the actual time fare is fare for drivers and passengers everything is goons up ( prices) my last bill at Vasstech was 2360£ at this price we have to maintain the vehicles soo the actual price list I think is ok

Response 13. My objection relates to the proposal of charges when carrying 5 or more passengers to a maximum of 8 of £1 per head.

My company is licensed under Richmondshire county council and the current tariff for 5 or more passengers is approx 50% more than a car tariff. Customers and drivers are happy with Richmondshire tariffs and I see no reason for it to change. Changing the present tariffs would not make it viable to run a 5 to 8 seater vehicle in Richmondshire, which in turn would affect the customer options and wheelchair users alike.

Response 14. I would like to object the new table of fares.

There is no minibus tariff. We have always had a minibus tariff in skipton.

According to the new tariff it’s not fair for all passengers. As the locals will pay more and the long distance travellers will benefit.

Please provide a tariff for time and half of t 1 and Time and half for t2 and time and half for t3.

Response 15. I wish to object to the proposed tariff rate, due to come into effect from 1st April 2023.

I am happy with the daytime rate at £4.00, but i object to tariff 2 and tariff 3 not being increased to what should be, time and a half on tariff 2 and double time on tariff 3.

These are unsocial hours times, and times when we are dealing with alcohol fuelled passengers, and hours of the greatest stress and higher possibilities of assaults, and difficult passengers, and feel we should be rewarded accordingly, to make it worth while working these hours.

Therefore i would like to propose tariff 2 should start at £6.00, and tariff 3 at £8.00

Response 16. I would like to object the tariff on the basis of the minibus tariff.

I drive a 8 seater taxi in the Craven District Council. We have always had a separate tariff when carrying more than four passengers.

Our tariff 4 is designated for minibuses. Tariff 4 works out to be 150% of tariff 1. This saves money for the customer as it saves them getting two taxis and benefits the driver as they can charge slightly more covering the costs of running a bigger vehicle.

The new tariff proposed is not fair in my point of view and will cause trouble for the drivers aswell.

Firstly if you are travelling around a mile, on tariff 1 will cost roughly £6 plus £8 for carrying 8 passengers. This will cost them roughly £14 for travelling one mile. On the otherhand customers travelling 20 miles it will cost them £70 plus £8 for a minibus. So total £78. How is this fair for the customers? Customers travelling locally will pay alot of money!

Secondly customers are Craven DC are use to seeing the meter and paying the price show on the meter. How can you see a different price on the meter and then add more charges. This will cause trouble for us minibus taxi drivers.

I would like to recommend that a separate tariff is made on the new table of fares for minibuses which is worked out to be 150% of tariff 1. This will make it fair for all customers travelling any distance.

We also had a tariff 5 which was used around Christmas time which was 150% of tariff 3. If you could make another tariff which works out to be 150% of tariff 2 will give the minibus drivers a fair and equal chance to make money and make it viable to maintain the vehicles.

The minibus taxis are a sort of specialist taxis which cost upto 50% more to purchase and maintain compared to a car. So please review the table of fares accordingly to some information i have provided.

Response 17. We have the following concerns about the proposed tariff

-Proposed Tariff 1 is good for small councils where jobs are within a small radius of 4 to 5 miles however it would not suit big councils like Hambleton District, Ryedale and Richmondshire. Its working out £2.10/miles after first 0.25 mile whilst our tariff in Richmondshire is £2.40/mile at the moment.

- Tariff 2 is time and half of the tariff 1 which is good. The issue is it starts at midnight which is too late. In Richmond night out finishes by 1am. Current tariff 2 in Richmondshire starts at 11pm which means drivers get chance to work on tariff 2 for couple of hours. So if it will start at midnight they wouldn't want to stay back to wait for tarriff 2. Which will create a massive gap in demand and supply. Which means more trouble and fights will be happening in and around town.

- Minibuses and MPVs have been neglected in the new proposed tariff. One pound extra charge per head does not justify minibus drivers. On current tariff we charge roughly £40 from Catterick to Darlington for 4 seater and roughly £60 for 8 seater. According to the new tariff, if its £40 for the car, it will be £44 for the minibus, which doesn't make sense. Minibuses should be time and half of the car tariff. If you don't make a separate tariff for the minibuses, after a couple of years there won't be any minibus in the whole county council. We have minibuses that are wheelchair accessible. If you dont look after the minibus drivers you are putting vulnerable people at risk also. Nobody will be willing to invest 30 to 40k on minibuses just to make the same amount of money like a normal car.

Response 18. Just regarding taxi fares, personal I’m not happy with your proposal, the reality is that everybody is striking at the moment, all my bills are as we all know increase, I’m happy with the current fare, Northallerton ( like all the others market towns in North Yorkshire)is a small town, I think £5 starting is the right price for the first mile, please consider very careful the actual cost of living! Ps: also I don’t know if is the right email address to complaint of the fact that I’ve been bullied several times by customers picking on my name which according with Hambleton we must to display on the dashboard my badge, I consider around my neck is more than enough, if they want to know my name they can always ask!

Response 19. Correct me if I am wrong, fare increases were introduced I believe in November 2022 in Selby and all meters in hackney carriage had to be calibrated to those tariffs. Am I correct in saying they are the tariffs that have been aligned with the other districts but will not be applied until 1st April 2023? Or are you going to introduce a different tariff to what the current tariffs are in place now? So, as I see it, another calibration for the meters in April 2023?

I give up, it's hardly surprising that there is a lack of Hackney Carriages in the area and many others what with the spiralling costs and the bureaucracy that surrounds the episode of trying to make a living.

I must add that these are my views and in no way reflect on the licensing team's efforts to keep us all going! For that it is really appreciated.

Response 20. I would like to strongly object to your proposal.

The £4 flag fall for the first 440 yards I feel is too high an increase, after the recent increase to £2:80. I feel this would deter customers from using Taxi’s for shorter distances.

The 20p increment for every 167.62 yards, or part thereof, I feel is too low, in my opinion, especially if we do lose customers, due to the increased flag drop.

You also need to be aware that in the Richmondshire area, the majority of wheelchair accessible vehicles are minibuses,therefore the vulnerable people would suffer due to lack of vehicles.

I propose a minibus tariff of Tariff 1 plus 50% - £4.50 flag fall, then 33p thereafter, then after 23:00, a 50% increase on the above.

I look forward to your response.

Response 21. I have one observation.

Originally tariff 2 in Ryedale commenced at 11pm. It currently sits at 9pm following an emergency tariff introduction to assist with the steep rise in fuel prices. The proposed fare structure has tariff 2 commencing at midnight. In Ryedale (Helmsley where we operate) we complete very little work after midnight as our nighttime economy is based on restaurant, pub and hotel journeys as there are no nightclubs etc to provide work.

Could I make a suggestion that tariff 2 commences at 11pm across North Yorkshire?

Response 22. I see nycc have increased the day tariff rate from £3.60 to £4.00, but have not adjusted the time and a half and double time rate to match.

Which obviously means we are not getting time and a half and double time on the day rate now.

I would like to request that both these rates are increased accordingly to reflect this.

Response 23. Just reading the proposal Tariff 1 is £4 I accept that. Why is tariff 2 not £6 and tariff 3 £8. Surely that would make sense as we often refer to it as time and a half or double time.

Response 24. I feel that for the area I drive in is too much of a rise . I would like to suggest a T1 start at £ 3.00 for the first half mile and then every tenth of a mile .25p. T2 start at £4.50 first half mile and then .40p every tenth of a mile. This ensures the local runs do not get hit to hard . And also trying to encourage the local populace to use the local transport. I also believe that a £1.00 extra per person on over 4 seaters is reasonable . Just to confirm my experience with in trade I have been working Richmondshire taxi rank for over 30 years.

Response 25. We need tariff 2 to start at 9pm at the latest not midnight as we as night drivers get paid extra as we have such a shortage so trying to get them out at night is impossible if we can't get paid more in rural areas we close at midnight so this tariff at midnight is useless to us we have always had 9pm and need this to remain

Response 26. I wish to add to my objection the new tariff shows anyone over 5 this should be anyone over 4 , we also need extras charge for carrying dogs or cats who are not assistance animals of a minimum of at least £2 per animal to allow for hair removal and cleaning after the animal has left the vehicle this is on most tariffs nationwide and needs to be used. tariff 2 is far too late it needs to be 7pm to be able to incentivise night drivers to work .The call out charge is not practical as we are in a very rural area so if we have to go 6 miles to do a 2 mile job and can only charge less than half the metered fare to go out there then these jobs will be abandoned this needs to be a set amount up to a maximum as ryedale do now in order for companies to be able to use and utilise this in our area , we would also like to know who is going to be paying for this recalibration as this isn't a rise the trade do not want it and this will put a financial burden on us for a change we overwhelmingly do not want. A universal tariff in one go over 7 districts just doesn't work our start price gos from 3.30 for half a mile to 4.00 for quarter of a mile and 4.50 for half a mile overnight this is ridiculous and we cannot use it so it will end up being so many different charges for the same customer under meter fare it will be ridiculous , this is being forced on a trade who don't want it the consultation took days to read all objections and decide they were just going to ignore them and go ahead , we all believe you had already made all decisions before the consultation finished as was evidenced by proposed fees and fares being available and we all knew them before this ended , we are sure this cannot be legal and seems to make a mockery of a consultation, we are taking legal advice on our next steps , many thanks

Response 27. I wish to object to the new tariff this will not work for ryedale at all it is a jump in price which will cause different companies in the area to charge different prices leading to massive confusion for customers and the licensing office being inundated with complaints. You cannot go from the current tariff to this in one go it's too much of an increase , also tariff 2 doesn't start till midnight this is not workable on our arwmea we can't get drivers on nights especially weekend ones now its almost impossible if they aren't getting paid more for this this needs to start at 7pm not midnight ryedlae currently starts at 9pm which is quite late all shift workers get more for working the late shift , taxis need to be able to encourage more drivers to work these so the safety of customers is catered to , many thanks,

Response 28. We strongly object to this tariff , it is not workable for all areas and will lead to divers charging varying prices under the metered tariff and up to it as such a huge hike from some of the areas , also the tariff 2 is too late starting at midnight we have a reduced number of drivers willing to work after 7pm already this will make it worse and cause problems for safety of vulnerable people at night , many thanks,

Response 29. We need tariff 2 to start at 9pm at the latest not midnight a as we have such a shortage of night drivers so trying to get them out at night is impossible if they can't get paid more. In rural areas we close at midnight so this tariff at midnight is useless to us we have always had 9pm and need this to remain or it will severely impact our ability to provide adequate cover in the evenings leaving people stranded , many thanks

Equality impact assessment (EIA) form: evidencing paying due regard to protected characteristics

(Form updated November 2021 – for LGR use)

North Yorkshire Hackney Carriage Maximum Fares

If you would like this information in another language or format such as Braille, large print or audio, please contact the Communications Unit on 01609 53 2013 or email communications@northyorks.gov.uk.

question mark

Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) are public documents. EIAs accompanying reports going to Councillors for decisions are published with the committee papers on our website and are available in hard copy at the relevant meeting. To help people to find completed EIAs it is good practice to publish them. This will help people to see for themselves how we have paid due regard in order to meet statutory requirements.

Please note: The decision has been made to complete EIAs at LGR programme level, workstream level and individual project level. The EIAs must be updated throughout the process of reorganisation and transformation.

Name of Workstream	Licensing
Lead Officer and contact details	Sharon Cousins, Licensing Manager Selby Council scousins@selby.gov.uk 01757 705101
Names and roles of other people involved in carrying out the EIA	Gareth Bentley, Food, Licensing and Occupational Safety Manager, Harrogate Borough Council Gareth.bentley@harrogate.gov.uk
How will you pay due regard? e.g. working group, individual officer	Hackney Carriage Drivers Hackney Carriage Proprietors Members of the public who use Hackney Carriage Vehicles businesses
When did the due regard process start?	June 2022

Section 1. Please describe briefly what this EIA is about. (e.g. are you starting a new service, changing how you do something, stopping doing something?)

The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (“the Act”) provides that in respect of charges for Hackney Carriages, “the Council may fix the rates or fares within the district”.

Officers working on the Licensing areas for the Local Government Reorganisation (“LGR”) process, established early on that there was a significant risk to the Council if a single Hackney Carriage (“HC”) and Private Hire (“PH”) licensing policy was not in place by day 1 of the new Council and had not adopted the Act. Due to this, a report is going before the Executive to seeking approval to adopt a HC and PH taxi licensing policy and the Act in February. If the Act is adopted, it will automatically create one ‘controlled district’ to reflect the administrative area of North Yorkshire Council from 1 April 2023. The creation of the new Council will bring together 7 licensing authorities who previously had their own Hackney Carriage Maximum Fare in place.

As part of the LGR process officers carried out a risk assessment that showed the risk factors if the Council was not to introduce one maximum HC fare from 1 April 2023.

The risks were as follows:

1. Complaints from drivers aggrieved by current different maximum fares than their colleagues in neighbouring zones in North Yorkshire.

2. Complaints from customers confused by varied fares in areas licensed by the one authority

3. Additional resources required to consider any subsequent fare increases (i.e., up to 7 separate consultations, cabinet meetings, newspaper advertisements etc.

The maximum fare proposal for Hackney Carriage Vehicles may affect those who rely on such a service, specifically those members of the public who do not wish to pre-book a journey via a Private Hire Operator. This Equality Impact Assessment is focused on the proposed draft maximum fare for the new North Yorkshire Council and not a change of policy, practices, or procedures.

Section 2. Why is this being proposed? What are the aims? What does the authority hope to achieve by it? (e.g. to save money, meet increased demand, do things in a better way.)

The risk assessment carried out by officers involved in the LGR process showed the risks to the Council if one maximum HC fare was not in place if the Act was adopted, and one HC zone for the whole of the North Yorkshire area created, as shown in section 1.

The aim of introducing one maximum HC Fare for the whole of the new authority area will result in:

1. A consistent maximum HC fare across the whole of the Council area. Drivers are not required to charge the maximum fare shown on the meter and are able to set their meters lower. The only requirement would be for the proprietor to adjust the taxi meter to the approved tariffs and show the approved Council fares or lower

2. Reducing the risk of confusion from customers who do not understand why there are different fares in different areas when the vehicles are licensed by the one authority.

3. Saving Officer and Councillor time to consider 7 separate maximum fares.

4. Saving the Council money by avoiding advertising 7 separate newspaper publications.

Overall, by having the one maximum fare across the whole of the North Yorkshire area will result in cost saving measures for the Council, whilst providing a consistent maximum fare across the whole of the Council area.

Section 3. What will change? What will be different for customers and/or staff?

Some legacy areas within the North Yorkshire will see an increase in the approved maximum fare. All the legacy areas have increased their maximum HC fares in 2022 due to the rise in fuel at the pump.

As this is a maximum Fare, drivers are under no obligation to increase the fares they currently charge. They only need to adjust their meters to the tariffs approved by the Council. If a particular area feel that the new maximum fare proposal is too high they are able to remain at the fare they are currently charging.

Section 4. Involvement and consultation (What involvement and consultation has been done regarding the proposal and what are the results? What consultation will be needed and how will it be done?)

A statutory public consultation took place between 6 and 20 February 2023. Representations were received that varied from the fares being too high to too low. Other comments were that the extra charge for carrying over 4 passengers was too low, Tariff 2 times should be brought forward.

As objections were received, these need to be considered by the Executive. As part of the Executives decision, they will provide a new date for the fares to come into effect if a fare is approved

Section 5. What impact will this proposal have on council budgets? Will it be cost neutral, have increased cost or reduce costs?

Please explain briefly why this will be the result.

The adoption of one maximum HC fare for the whole of the North Yorkshire area will reduce costs for the new Council. Having the one maximum HC fare will mean that only one newspaper notice will need to be published and officers will only need to consider one maximum fare when the fares require reviewing in the future.

Section 6. How will this proposal affect people with protected characteristics?	No impact	Make things better	Make things worse	Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.
Age		X	X	There is potential for an increase in fares to impact disproportionately on the elderly and people with disabilities for example, some of whom rely heavily on use of taxi's to go about their everyday lives. Over time competition may result in fares going down.
Disability		X	X	There is potential for an increase in fares to impact disproportionately on the elderly and people with disabilities for example, some of whom rely heavily on use of taxi's to go about their everyday lives. Over time competition may result in fares going down.
Sex	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Race	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Gender reassignment	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Sexual orientation	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Religion or belief	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Pregnancy or maternity	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.
Marriage or civil partnership	X			The tariff would apply to everyone in the Council area.

Section 7. How will this proposal affect people with the following characteristics	No impact	Make things better	Make things worse	Why will it have this effect? Provide evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.
Live in a rural area	X			There is no need to charge more than the fare currently set in a particular area. Competition helps to drive prices down or be consistent with fares already set in an area.
Have a low income		X		Competition in pricing may eventually drive down fares in local areas.
Carers (unpaid family or friend)	X			As above.
Health and wellbeing issues	X			As above.

Section 8. Geographic impact – Please detail where the impact will be (please tick all that apply)
North Yorkshire wide	X
Craven district	X
Hambleton district	X
Harrogate district	X
Richmondshire district	X
Ryedale district	X
Scarborough district	X
Selby district	X
If you have ticked one or more districts, will specific town(s)/village(s) be particularly impacted? If so, please specify below.

Section 9. Will the proposal affect anyone more because of a combination of protected characteristics? (e.g. older women or young gay men) State what you think the effect may be and why, providing evidence from engagement, consultation and/or service user data or demographic information etc.

N/A

Section 10. Next steps to address the anticipated impact. Select one of the following options and explain why this has been chosen. (Remember: we have an anticipatory duty to make reasonable adjustments so that disabled people can access services and work for us)	Tick option chosen
1. No adverse impact - no major change needed to the proposal. There is no potential for discrimination or adverse impact identified.	X
2. Adverse impact - adjust the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We will change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, or we will achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people.
3. Adverse impact - continue the proposal - The EIA identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. We cannot change our proposal to reduce or remove these adverse impacts, nor can we achieve our aim in another way which will not make things worse for people. (There must be compelling reasons for continuing with proposals which will have the most adverse impacts. Get advice from Legal Services)
4. Actual or potential unlawful discrimination - stop and remove the proposal – The EIA identifies actual or potential unlawful discrimination. It must be stopped.
Explanation of why option has been chosen. (Include any advice given by Legal Services.) As each legacy area have their own maximum HC fare currently, there is no risk of discrimination by approving the draft HC Fare proposal for the new Council. There is a procedure in place if representations to the public consultation are received.

Section 11. If the proposal is to be implemented how will you find out how it is really affecting people? (How will you monitor and review the changes?)

A public consultation will take place and as stated in section 4 if representations are received, they will be considered by the Executive and another Equality Impact Assessment will be carried out.

Section 12. Action plan. List any actions you need to take which have been identified in this EIA, including post implementation review to find out how the outcomes have been achieved in practice and what impacts there have actually been on people with protected characteristics.
Action	Lead	By when	Progress	Monitoring arrangements
Approval for consultation of the maximum HC Fare	Sharon Cousins and Gareth Bentley	March 2022	N/A	Consultation responses

Section 13. Summary Summarise the findings of your EIA, including impacts, recommendation in relation to addressing impacts, including any legal advice, and next steps. This summary should be used as part of the report to the decision maker.

The proposed fare is a maximum and drivers can (and it is hoped they do) charge the rate that is affordable for the customer whilst enabling the drivers to make a reasonable standard of living.

Some legacy areas would see a rise in the maximum fares that customers could potentially pay to use hackney carriages should the harmonised fare proposal be approved.

There is a risk that increased fares may tip the balance of affordability for some groups with protected characteristics. There is potential for an increase in fares to impact disproportionately on the elderly and people with disabilities for example, some of whom rely heavily on use of taxis to go about their everyday lives. However, it is expected that over time market forces will come into effect and prices will become more competitive.

Section 14. Sign off section

This full EIA was completed by:

Name: Sharon Cousins

Job title: Licensing Manager, Selby District Council

Signature: S Cousins

Completion date: 9 March 2023

Authorised by relevant senior officer (signature): Paul Thompson

Date: 9 March 2023

Tariff 1 (Between 6am and midnight)
Flag fall for the first 440 yds or part thereof Drop at 440 yds and every 167.62 yards or part thereof: Waiting time for each period of 37.36 seconds or part thereof:	£4.00 £0.20 £0.20

Tariff 2 (Between midnight and 6am) + (Public holidays) *
Flag fall for the first 440 yds or part thereof Drop at 440 yds and every 167.62 yards or part thereof: Waiting time for each period of 37.36 seconds or part thereof: *All public holidays other than those listed in tariff 3 tariff 2 applies throughout the 24 hour period.	£5.40 £0.30 £0.30
Tariff 3 (Christmas and New Year) *
Flag fall for the first 440 yds or part thereof: Drop at 440 yds and every 167.62 or part thereof: Waiting time for each period of 37.36 seconds or part thereof: *From 18:00 hrs 24th December to 06:00 hrs 27th December and 18:00 hrs 31st December to 06:00 hrs 2nd January.	£7.20 £0.40 £0.40

LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1976

HACKNEY CARRIAGE FARES

Taxi information- Selby

Hackney carriage (taxi) fares as from 18 November 2022

Taxis with wheelchair access

Tariff 3 (Christmas and New Year) *

Recommendation 1

Recommendation 2

Recommendation 3

Reasons for recommendation

Recommendation 4

Reasons for recommendation

Completion date: 9 March 2023