Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice to Elizabeth Jackson, Principal Democratic Services Officer, and supplied the text by midday on Thursday 11 September, three working days before the day of the meeting. Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item. Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak:
· at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which are not otherwise on the Agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes);
· when the relevant Agenda item is being considered if they wish to speak on a matter which is on the Agenda for this meeting.
If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not
wish to be recorded, please inform the Leader who will instruct anyone who may
be taking a recording to cease while you speak.
Minutes:
Three public statements had been received in relation to Minute 741 – Review of Maximum Hackney Carriage Fares, which were dealt with at that Minute and are detailed below.
1.
Statement from Richard Fieldman – read
out at the meeting
Dear Councillors
Today you are going to be asked to determine this year’s
tariff charges, as requested by the trade back in January/February, to which at
this current time, is fourteen months since our last increase, back in July
2024, and by the time today’s decision is made and implemented, it will be
fifteen months.
For more years than I can remember now, the trade and the
licensing department have relied on a fare formula used by Transport for
London, to determine any increase that the London taxis are awarded annually,
it is totally independent and impartial, with all figures taken into account of
the increase in cost of living, fuel prices, insurance prices, the cost of new
and used vehicles, as well as the increase in maintenance charges ,ie, garage labour and parts costs, and kicks out a
percentage increase needed to keep the trade in a profitable situation, this
formula however, does not take into account the wage needed for the driver. I
asked Mr Bentley to run this formula last February to give the trade an idea of
where we needed to be in requesting a tariff increase, it produced a figure of
8%, so therefore as I was constructing an increase request, I aimed my target
at 5%, feeling that this was both fair for the trade and public alike.
You have before you the results of a consultation that was
conducted by the licensing department, asking members of the public how they
felt about taxi charges in the area, well guess what? No surprise that they
think they are too high, and in true human nature, if each
and every one of us is asked what we think about the costs of any of the
services, or products we use, with a view to the possibility of the price
increasing, we are going to say we think they are already too expensive. So the outcome of that survey is somewhat inevitable, but
the fact remains, the taxi industry needs to not only be able to afford the
high standards expected by the council, but needs the ability to maintain their
vehicles to a high standard, as well as make a decent living to keep up with
the cost of living.
It is true to say that a small percentage of the trade do
not want an increase in the tariff rate, and that is mainly down to the influx
of Uber into the area, however, Uber drivers have a massive distinct advantage
over us, they are being licensed by much less expensive councils than ours, are
running older vehicles, are not maintained to the levels ours are, and are
backed up and supported financially by a huge company. We cannot nor must not,
try and compete with Uber as far as tariffs are concerned, that is a road to
destruction, a route we can never win, so the answer is not to try to compete
with their fares, but be allowed to run profitably, or we will not have a
business to compete with.
The other issue that must be taken into consideration is, if
we are not given an increase this year, then we start to get to a stage of
having to play catch up further down the line, meaning a bigger increase next
year, and the year after, which disgruntles the public even more, and has more
of a detrimental effect.
Last year the council did not increase the night time and
public holiday rates, which saw us lose time and a half and double time rates,
rates that the normal working person gets when working unsocial times and
public holidays, this has led to a decrease in drivers working these times, as
they are not being suitably paid for it, leaving members of the public
struggling to get taxis during these times, this needs to be reinstated, time
and a half, and double time of the day rate, as everyone else is allowed to
earn in their occupation.
I ask you all today to think very carefully before accepting
the officers recommendation, and to think as business
people, by allowing the trade to keep their businesses up to date with the ever
increasing costs, and to also earn a decent living.
Please remember, not all taxi drivers are in the same boat,
not all work for companies and are supplied with a constant supply of jobs,
many are independents, relying solely on the taxi ranks, where in some cases
you can sit for nearly two hours without a job. If you do not want an increase
in the tariff rate for whatever reason, you are under no legal obligation to
have your meter altered to reflect the new rate, but it is vitally important
that those drivers that do need it, are allowed the privilege of having it.
Thank you for listening.
Richard Fieldman
2.
Statement from Lisa Ridsdale – read out
at the meeting
Dear All
I would like to thank Richard for his significant
contributions to this matter. I am also inquiring about the status of an email
I previously sent, which requested an increase in representation for over 50
licensed drivers in North Yorkshire. That email included the badge numbers of
all relevant drivers, and I have not seen any reflection of this request.
Following the merger of all seven districts, Ryedale
experienced a 20 percent decrease in the running mile, a rate at which we have
been operating since. We believe it is unjust for our fares to remain unchanged
given the substantial increase in minimum wage.
If we do not receive a fare increase, we will unfortunately
be forced to reduce our number of drivers, as sustaining their wages will
become unfeasible. The Take Me group employs over 100 drivers in North
Yorkshire, and we are concerned that a refusal to increase fares will impact
our ability to provide essential public service.
We concur with Richard that a 5 percent increase is a fair
adjustment. Drivers who prefer not to charge the metered rate will retain the
option to charge less.
Many thanks,
Lisa Ridsdale
3.
Statement from Kevin O’Boyle – statement
previously circulated by email so was not read out at the meeting
1.
On 1st April 2025, Integrated Passenger
Transport at North Yorkshire Council, without any request from the trade
whatsoever, gave a 3% increase to vehicles carrying out their school runs. This was based on expense increases from
January to December 2024. One would
assume from this that the Council recognise that the trade overall is
justifiable in asking for a fare increase.
2.
Survey. I
feel that this was flawed. If one was to
ask any member of the public, "do you think this price is too high?",
irrespective of what it was for, under the current financial climate the answer
would be "yes". Regarding
drivers in Harrogate (which is the only area I can speak about) we have a very
high percentage of
drivers who virtually work part time to top up their
pensions. We have others that do it for
a hobby. We have a
large number of drivers who only work five days a week -Monday to
Friday. Personally, I would not call
these people taxi drivers. There are
also many drivers who never work weekends, or bank holidays, and take a
fortnight off at Christmas. These people
are commenting on surveys that do not directly affect them.
3.
Cost of Living.
As well as cost of living expenses that we share in
common with everyone else, we have the added burden of the minimum wage
increasing by 6.7% this year, plus national insurance and pension contribution
increases. I would also ask where Mr
Bentley gets his diesel from at £1.34 per litre? The price in Harrogate ranges from £1.40 to
£1.45 per litre.
4.
Night time rates. There has been no fare increase since 2023,
when the new tariff 2 rate was introduced.
However, due to rising costs, I find that we are delivering this service
at a very much reduced income. This following the same path as above -
increases in NMW, pension and national insurance contributions.
a.
May I point out that there are less than 5% of
drivers willing to work full night shifts.
The reason for this is a decline in the night time
economy in Harrogate. As well as there being many decent honest folk, we also have a large number of what can only be
described as scum. We have
to deal with drunks, people being sick in the cars (or worse). Although there is a soilage charge
incorporated in the fare structure, at times actually getting
this from the customer proves impossible.
We have people who blatantly have no intention of paying the fare, and
"do a runner". Going to the
police proves pointless. Their first
argument is that it is a civil, not a criminal matter - it is actually theft. If
one does try to pursue this, one can spend 2-3 hours making a statement,
knowing full well that no action will be taken
b.
There is also a major problem in Harrogate with
drugs. Through the night there is a huge
amount of toing and froing of passengers delivering or buying drugs They obviously
don't tell the driver what they are doing, but it is not hard to work out. The driver then runs the risk of, if stopped
by the police, that these passengers could secrete their packages in the
vehicle. If found, the driver could be
prosecuted for possession of drugs, consequently
receive a criminal record and losing his taxi licence.
c.
In 2023 the minimum wage was £10.42 per
hour. It is now £12.21. An increase of £1.79 per hour. It is now becoming impossible to absorb these
costs. If we do not get some kind of
increase to help us, my company would have to look at withdrawing our night time service, and I know that other companies in the
area feel the same.
d.
I do personally feel that the alterations to the
start and finish of tariff 2 - 2200hrs to 0700hrs, to be harsh on the
public. I feel it would be much fairer
to revert back to 2300hrs to 0600hrs.
5.
Subsidies. As you are possibly aware, we receive
no help from government or anybody else, but we are an integral part of the
public transport industry. I read that a
bus company recently received 12Million to buy electric buses. All their fares are subsidised - from bus
passes to cheap day travel, subsidies for runs that would normally be
unprofitable. Because of the equalities
act, we are actually subsidising disabled passengers.
6.
Comparison of Fares. The fare comparison for a 2
mile journey - York charge the same as us, and are due for a review
imminently, Leeds are 40p dearer and are also due for a review, Lancaster,
Redcar, Durham, Kirklees, Bradford, Sheffield and Wakefield are all shortly due
for a review.
I obviously don't know individual Council members'
backgrounds but can assume that some of you have owned your own
businesses. I do however know that you
are all intelligent people. I hope that
I have convinced you that a fare increase is required, and that a 5% increase
will not by any means meet the increased expenses we are incurring, and that we
will still be absorbing some of the increases ourselves. I hope that you feel that our 5% request is
reasonable for both customers and the trade.
Response from the Executive Member for Managing our
Environment:
We would like to thank members of the trade, including Mr Richard Fieldman, Ms Lisa Ridsdale and Mr O’Boyle, for their detailed submissions and continued engagement throughout this process. Their input highlights the financial pressures drivers and operators face in general, reflecting the challenges of operating within the current market conditions. We can also confirm that Ms Ridsdale’s initial email was received and considered as part of the fare review.
Mr Fieldman referred to the Transport for London (TfL) formula, which suggested an 8% uplift to existing fares. While the TfL index can provide a useful benchmark, it is designed for a very different operating environment and, as Mr Fieldman himself noted, does not take account of all associated costs. Relying mechanically on a formula would introduce rigidity, risk overlooking the views of the public and the trade and fail to reflect local market factors such as competition from ride-hailing services. For these reasons, the licensing authority exercises discretion to consider all relevant factors and reach an informed decision rather than being bound by mathematical calculations. Local decisions must reflect local evidence. Factors such as cost of living and fuel prices have been included and sourced from the Office for National Statistics and the AA. Mr O’Boyle refers to the rise in minimum wage and national insurance contributions. These would normally refer to Private Hire Operators offices which employ staff, whilst the fare review focusses exclusively on Hackney Carriages. The Council does not regulate the fares charged for Private Hire Journeys.
Recent comparisons with neighbouring authorities indicate that, for many journeys, fares in North Yorkshire are already high in relative terms. Applying a formula to dictate annual increases would only widen the gap between taxis licensed by North Yorkshire Council and those licensed elsewhere, particularly where there is no expectation of annual increases. This disparity can encourage the public to pre-book taxis from outside the county as a cheaper alternative.
It is also important to note that the evidence does not indicate an across-the-board increase in operating costs. Paragraphs 3.6.1 and 3.6.4 of the report confirm that the price of fuel and the overall cost of running a vehicle have decreased since the last review, although other costs, such as insurance, may still present challenges.
The consultation, which received 292 responses, showed that many residents feel current fares are already too high, particularly for night-time and festive periods. Comparative analysis supports this view, showing that North Yorkshire’s fares are among the highest regionally, especially for shorter journeys and during unsocial hours. It is also relevant that many respondents (both from the public and the trade) expressed a preference for no increase in maximum fares. While there is no obligation on drivers to charge the maximum rates, any increase would be visible to the public and could influence their willingness to use taxis. Trade members opposed to a fare increase would therefore likely be affected by such a decision in any case.
While concerns have been raised about consultation bias, it is only one of several factors considered alongside cost data, trade feedback, and fare comparisons with neighbouring authorities. This approach ensures that decisions are based on a rounded view rather than any single source.
Mr O’Boyle refers to an increase in contractual payments given by the Integrated Passenger Transport Team for school and social transport. These payments are governed by the terms of a contract and are entirely separate from the setting of maximum fares for general journeys.
Mr O’Boyle also refers to customers carrying drugs in licensed vehicles. Evidence of this should be passed to North Yorkshire Police. The Council is happy to assist with this and will take a strong line where a driver's involvement can be evidenced.
Finally, it is worth noting that the maximum tariff sets an upper limit only. Drivers remain free to charge less if they wish, providing flexibility for operators to respond to local market conditions.
We are grateful for the constructive input from the trade and can confirm that all views have been carefully considered as part of this review.