Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
RESOLVED that the Committee – (a) support a modified version of the original proposal taking into consideration the representations at Appendix D to the report, with adjustments to – · Tariff 1: Increase from £2.50 per mile to £3.00 per mile · Tariff 3: Increase from £3.75 per mile to £4.50 per mile (b) note the proposed modification was reflected in the representations received at Appendix D to the report and responded directly to concerns raised during the consultation process. An updated proposed version with the above modification was attached at Appendix E to the report; (c) note that the adoption of the Hackney Carriage table of fares was an Executive function. Therefore, any final tariff would require a Lead Member Delegated Decision to ensure the Council met its constitutional obligations, and (d) authorise officers to arrange a working group with the licensed trade and committee members within a period of six months to discuss further matters around taxi fares.
RESOLVED that the forward work programme be received and approved.
RESOLVED that the application for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence be refused. The reasons for the Licensing Committee’s decision were as follows – The Committee had carefully considered all the representations heard at the meeting and read all the information provided by officers in advance of the meeting together with the submissions provided on behalf of the Applicant. The matter had been referred to the Committee as Officers had been unable to make a decision under delegated authority in this instance and the application fell outside of the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Licensing Policy (“the Policy”). Members had regard to paragraph 5.14.8 of the Policy in relation to this: “Licences will not be renewed after expiry. If a licence holder fails to renew their licence on or before the respective expiry date, the licence will lapse and become invalid. Licence holders should note that if they allow their licence to expire, they will be required to make a new application in full. This will obviously incur a potentially significant time delay, and dependent upon the age of the existing licensed vehicle, it may require a change in vehicle to meet the age requirements set out in Section 5.4.2 of this policy. The cost implications of failing to renew a licence could therefore be significant, and licence holders are therefore strongly advised to ensure that they renew their licence before the expiry date. If the licence holder is aware of any reason that they may not be able to renew their licence before the expiry date, they must inform the Licensing Section immediately.” The Committee found that the Applicant was fully aware of the risks of this application being dealt with in this way having been written to twice explaining the consequences of not renewing the licence before it expired. Members must follow the Policy before them and should only depart from Policy where there are exceptional reasons. The Committee therefore considered this application as a new application for a licence given that the previous licence lapsed due to having not been renewed before its expiry. The application was considered in line with the conditions contained within the Policy. Members determined in this instance that they did not have good reason to depart from the Policy due to the following – · the vehicle in question was 8 years old which was 3 years older than the 5-year requirement detailed in the Policy · members heard during the meeting from the Licensing Officer who confirmed the vehicle did not have a history of being maintained to the highest standard · the safety of users was a paramount consideration for the Committee and given the maintenance history, members were concerned · members heard of the outstanding recall in place on the vehicle, which had been outstanding for a lengthy period of time and therefore was an additional concern for the Committee regarding the maintenance and safety of the vehicle. Based on the information before the Committee and considering the Policy, Members did not find there were extenuating or exceptional circumstances in this case to depart from the Policy. Consequently, the Committee resolved to refuse the application. The Chair conveyed the Committee’s decision to the Applicant and the Legal Advisor reported on the reasons for that decision. The Applicant was also advised of his right of appeal against the decision. The meeting concluded at 11.25 am.
Councillors Paul Keddie and Andrea Tomlin.
Whilst there was no requirement to declare an interest, for transparency purposes, Councillor Brian Jones advised that he was a member of the same political group as one of the persons quoted in the documentation for agenda item 8 – Application for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence (585581).
No urgent matters had been raised.
The minutes of the Licensing Committee held on 3 June 2025 were submitted. RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 3 June 2025 be received and confirmed as a correct record.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED that the Committee – (a) support a modified version of the original proposal taking into consideration the representations at Appendix D to the report, with adjustments to – · Tariff 1: Increase from £2.50 per mile to £3.00 per mile · Tariff 3: Increase from £3.75 per mile to £4.50 per mile (b) note the proposed modification was reflected in the representations received at Appendix D to the report and responded directly to concerns raised during the consultation process. An updated proposed version with the above modification was attached at Appendix E to the report; (c) note that the adoption of the Hackney Carriage table of fares was an Executive function. Therefore, any final tariff would require a Lead Member Delegated Decision to ensure the Council met its constitutional obligations, and (d) authorise officers to arrange a working group with the licensed trade and committee members within a period of six months to discuss further matters around taxi fares.
The Lead Officer (Licensing) submitted a report (previously circulated) seeking members’ review of the existing table of fares for Hackney Carriage vehicles taking into account the representations received following the consultation on the proposed tariff charges. The current fares came into effect on 1 July 2022. Proposed changes to the hackney carriages fares and charges had been approved for consultation by the Licensing Committee in June 2025. 21 objections had been received, primarily citing insufficient increase in the proposed fare structure, and engagement opportunities had been offered to all respondents with a limited number of licence holders participating. The discussions had been constructive and informed the officer recommendation to modify Tariff 1 and 3 and increase the rate per mile (Tariff 2 was a new tariff and did not require any further modification) to respond to the concerns raised and better reflect the cost of longer journeys and provide a more balanced overall fare increase beyond the initial start rate. A further 24 letters had been received from licensed drivers in support of a fare increase after the consultation period had ended and the recommendation modified. The Lead Officer (Licensing) guided members through the report detail and consultation responses which had led to the recommendation to further increase Tariff 1 and 3. Details had been provided of the consultation process, the original proposal, the amended proposal, a comparison table of fares, representations received and a Wellbeing Impact Assessment. Members were also reminded that the fares set the maximum fare that could be charged (a lower fare could be agreed with the passenger) and related to journeys undertaken wholly within the county. Any final tariff amendment would require a Lead Member Delegated Decision. It was noted that the intention going forward was for officers to initiate an annual review process and early engagement with the trade prior to the development of any proposals to ensure their views were fully reflected in future recommendations. Members carefully considered the report including the response to the consultation, options available to them, and officer recommendations. Despite his previous support for a fare increase, in light of the information contained within the report Councillor Brian Jones had some reservations about the best way forward. He sought further information about the general health and viability of the taxi trade in both the North and South of the county, particularly given the impact a change in fares could have on the trade itself, visitors and the most vulnerable. If the report recommendations were approved, he asked that a workshop be arranged with the licensed trade and councillors with a view to working together on a fare structure to balance both the needs of the taxi trade and taxi users. Councillor Gwyneth Ellis highlighted particular concerns raised within the consultation responses which needed to be addressed and the need to ensure a decent living for the licensed trade. She also referred to the absence of hackney carriages and a lack of private hire vehicles generally available in her ward area and did not consider the proposed table of fares would address that problem. However, she was supportive of a working group as suggested to best progress the issue going forward and for an increase in fares as recommended in the interim. Councillor Joan Butterfield thanked officers for the clear and comprehensive report. She had received representations that the taxi trade was depressed and had particular sympathy with small companies and individual providers. She supported the recommended increase in fares as an initial measure and a subsequent meeting between the trade and elected members to inform future fares and also highlighted the need to listen to, and consider the impact on, communities. That position was also supported by Councillor Ellie Chard. Officers responded to members’ questions and comments as follows – · a workshop with the licensed trade and committee members was supported with a timescale of six months suggested (prior to the next fare review) · the Council did not hold data on taxi usage in the county; it could be provided in future, but it would be reliant on Licence Holders supplying the necessary data · most hackney carriages were in the North of the county with around 14 in Ruthin · there were no licensed hackney carriages in Llangollen or Corwen, only private hire vehicles which were not subject to the hackney carriage tariffs · the modified table of fares (Appendix E to the report) addressed many of the concerns raised in the representations including the cost of longer journeys · any fare increase approved by the Committee would require a Lead Member Delegated Decision and once implemented would remain in place until such time as the fares were varied again (following the outcome of a further review). The Chair felt the extensive report aimed to be fair to both residents and the taxi trade and reminded members that taxi drivers could agree a lesser charge with passengers. She reiterated that officers had committed to undertake an annual review of fares going forward and had agreed to the proposal to convene a working group involving the licensed trade, committee members, and other relevant bodies as appropriate to work to address concerns and a way forward. Councillor Brian Jones clarified that the working group should be a separate process to the annual review and councillors had a role to promote that engagement and genuine interest in the matter with a view to maximising attendance from the trade. The Legal Advisor provided advice in terms of the decision making process for this item including an additional proposition in relation to the suggested working group. Councillor Joan Butterfield proposed, seconded by Councillor Brian Jones, the officer recommendations as set out in paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 of the report together with an additional recommendation to arrange a working group with the licensed trade and committee members, within six months, to discuss taxi fares. Upon being put to the vote it was – RESOLVED that the Committee – (a) support a modified version of the original proposal taking into consideration the representations at Appendix D to the report, with adjustments to – · Tariff 1: Increase from £2.50 per mile to £3.00 per mile · Tariff 3: Increase from £3.75 per mile to £4.50 per mile (b) note the proposed modification was reflected in the representations received at Appendix D to the report and responded directly to concerns raised during the consultation process. An updated proposed version with the above modification was attached at Appendix E to the report; (c) note that the adoption of the Hackney Carriage table of fares was an Executive function. Therefore, any final tariff would require a Lead Member Delegated Decision to ensure the Council met its constitutional obligations, and (d) authorise officers to arrange a working group with the licensed trade and committee members within a period of six months to discuss further matters around taxi fares.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED that the forward work programme be received and approved.
The Lead Officer (Licensing) presented the Licensing Committee’s forward work programme for consideration (previously circulated). RESOLVED that the forward work programme be received and approved.
RESOLVED that under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the Press and Public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 12 and 13 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Members were advised that this application had since been withdrawn.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED that the application for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence be refused. The reasons for the Licensing Committee’s decision were as follows – The Committee had carefully considered all the representations heard at the meeting and read all the information provided by officers in advance of the meeting together with the submissions provided on behalf of the Applicant. The matter had been referred to the Committee as Officers had been unable to make a decision under delegated authority in this instance and the application fell outside of the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Licensing Policy (“the Policy”). Members had regard to paragraph 5.14.8 of the Policy in relation to this: “Licences will not be renewed after expiry. If a licence holder fails to renew their licence on or before the respective expiry date, the licence will lapse and become invalid. Licence holders should note that if they allow their licence to expire, they will be required to make a new application in full. This will obviously incur a potentially significant time delay, and dependent upon the age of the existing licensed vehicle, it may require a change in vehicle to meet the age requirements set out in Section 5.4.2 of this policy. The cost implications of failing to renew a licence could therefore be significant, and licence holders are therefore strongly advised to ensure that they renew their licence before the expiry date. If the licence holder is aware of any reason that they may not be able to renew their licence before the expiry date, they must inform the Licensing Section immediately.” The Committee found that the Applicant was fully aware of the risks of this application being dealt with in this way having been written to twice explaining the consequences of not renewing the licence before it expired. Members must follow the Policy before them and should only depart from Policy where there are exceptional reasons. The Committee therefore considered this application as a new application for a licence given that the previous licence lapsed due to having not been renewed before its expiry. The application was considered in line with the conditions contained within the Policy. Members determined in this instance that they did not have good reason to depart from the Policy due to the following – · the vehicle in question was 8 years old which was 3 years older than the 5-year requirement detailed in the Policy · members heard during the meeting from the Licensing Officer who confirmed the vehicle did not have a history of being maintained to the highest standard · the safety of users was a paramount consideration for the Committee and given the maintenance history, members were concerned · members heard of the outstanding recall in place on the vehicle, which had been outstanding for a lengthy period of time and therefore was an additional concern for the Committee regarding the maintenance and safety of the vehicle. Based on the information before the Committee and considering the Policy, Members did not find there were extenuating or exceptional circumstances in this case to depart from the Policy. Consequently, the Committee resolved to refuse the application. The Chair conveyed the Committee’s decision to the Applicant and the Legal Advisor reported on the reasons for that decision. The Applicant was also advised of his right of appeal against the decision. The meeting concluded at 11.25 am.
A confidential report by the Head of Planning, Public Protection and Countryside Services (previously circulated) was submitted upon – (i) an application having been received for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence; (ii) the vehicle having been previously licensed as a Hackney Carriage but the licence had not been renewed before expiry of the existing licence and therefore must be treated as a new vehicle licence application; (iii) officers having not been in a position to grant the application as the vehicle did not comply with the Council’s existing policy which specified that all vehicles licensed under a new application must be up to a maximum of 5 years old from the date of first registration; (iv) background information and associated documentation having been provided including the Applicant’s supporting statement together with vehicle compliance/MOT history, an outstanding recall on the vehicle, and use of the vehicle without a valid Certificate of Compliance/MOT Certificate, and (v) the Applicant having been invited to attend the meeting in support of the application and to answer members’ questions thereon. The Applicant was in attendance and accompanied by a relative who also had an interest in the application. The Enforcement Officer – Licensing presented the report, and the Licensing Committee was asked to consider whether it would be appropriate to depart from the Council’s policy concerning age requirements to grant the vehicle application. The Applicant and his relation presented their case advising they had a relatively new business, were still learning the complexities, and had made a genuine mistake not renewing the licence on time. The circumstances surrounding the submission of the late renewal application were elaborated upon and use of the vehicle without a valid Compliance Certificate was clarified. Assurances were provided regarding the quality of the vehicle and work carried out on it. The financial impact on the business due to refusal of the late renewal was highlighted and they felt a harsh view had been taken in not granting the renewal application. The Applicant and his relation responded to questions regarding anomalies with the accounts given regarding the use of the vehicle following failure of the Compliance Test, the longstanding recall on the vehicle, evidence presented which suggested the vehicle had not been maintained to the highest standards, and any lessons learned with steps taken to ensure timely future renewals. Both disagreed with the Council’s vehicle age restriction policy which they felt penalised licence holders and older vehicles. Officers confirmed two reminder letters had been sent to the Applicant which clearly detailed the consequences of not renewing before the expiry date and the expiry date was printed on the rear taxi plate affixed to the vehicle which should be subject to daily checks by licence holders. High mileage was not considered an issue provided the vehicle was well maintained. In a final statement the Applicant and his relation said they had learned from the mistake and measures had been put in place to ensure it did not happen again. Assurances were given that the car was well maintained and open to inspection. The Committee adjourned to consider the application and it was – RESOLVED that the application for a Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence be refused. The reasons for the Licensing Committee’s decision were as follows – The Committee had carefully considered all the representations heard at the meeting and read all the information provided by officers in advance of the meeting together with the submissions provided on behalf of the Applicant. The matter had been referred to the Committee as Officers had been unable to make a decision under delegated authority in this instance and the application fell outside of the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Licensing Policy (“the Policy”). Members had regard to paragraph 5.14.8 of the Policy in relation to this: “Licences will not be renewed after expiry. If a licence holder fails to renew their licence on or before the respective expiry date, the licence will lapse and become invalid. Licence holders should note that if they allow their licence to expire, they will be required to make a new application in full. This will obviously incur a potentially significant time delay, and dependent upon the age of the existing licensed vehicle, it may require a change in vehicle to meet the age requirements set out in Section 5.4.2 of this policy. The cost implications of failing to renew a licence could therefore be significant, and licence holders are therefore strongly advised to ensure that they renew their licence before the expiry date. If the licence holder is aware of any reason that they may not be able to renew their licence before the expiry date, they must inform the Licensing Section immediately.” The Committee found that the Applicant was fully aware of the risks of this application being dealt with in this way having been written to twice explaining the consequences of not renewing the licence before it expired. Members must follow the Policy before them and should only depart from Policy where there are exceptional reasons. The Committee therefore considered this application as a new application for a licence given that the previous licence lapsed due to having not been renewed before its expiry. The application was considered in line with the conditions contained within the Policy. Members determined in this instance that they did not have good reason to depart from the Policy due to the following – · the vehicle in question was 8 years old which was 3 years older than the 5-year requirement detailed in the Policy · members heard during the meeting from the Licensing Officer who confirmed the vehicle did not have a history of being maintained to the highest standard · the safety of users was a paramount consideration for the Committee and given the maintenance history, members were concerned · members heard of the outstanding recall in place on the vehicle, which had been outstanding for a lengthy period of time and therefore was an additional concern for the Committee regarding the maintenance and safety of the vehicle. Based on the information before the Committee and considering the Policy, Members did not find there were extenuating or exceptional circumstances in this case to depart from the Policy. Consequently, the Committee resolved to refuse the application. The Chair conveyed the Committee’s decision to the Applicant and the Legal Advisor reported on the reasons for that decision. The Applicant was also advised of his right of appeal against the decision. The meeting concluded at 11.25 am.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Dyw'r cyngor ddim wedi cofnodi presenoldeb ar gyfer y cyfarfod hwn.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.