CONTINUED
FROM PAGE 54
What’s going On? TfL TPH Problems
The word ‘Taxi’ causes Wheelchair
Accessible Vehicle Failure – Madness!
At the beginning of February 2017 we received a
call from one of our members regarding one of their
specialist vehicles being refused re-licensing, they
were advised by the testing centre to contact TfL
TPH but had no joy. We subsequently found they had
been given the wrong contact number so we utilised
our contacts to point them in the right direction.
TfL TPH advised us:
The vehicle was refused a vehicle inspection and
subsequently not licenced as a private hire vehicle for the
following reasons:
• The design of the vehicle interior contravenes section
7(2)(a)(iii) of the Private Hire Vehicles (London)
Act 1998 which states: is not of such a design and
appearance as would lead any person to believe that
the vehicle is a London cab.
• The V5C documentation relating to this vehicle states
the body type as “taxi”.
We were told ‘I understand the disappointment felt by
your member as this vehicle has previously been licenced
in London, however, as discussed this was an error of
judgement by our contractor. We cannot continue to
licence this vehicle, or any vehicle with this interior
configuration, going forward’.
Chairman Steve Wright wrote back to say:
Following your response and further investigation, I believe
an error has been made on the interpretation and most
importantly the intention of the section 7(2)(a)(iii) of the
Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998, regarding our
member’s vehicle.
Having worked closely with Sir George Young and the PCO
when Sir George’s Bill was being drafted, I believe that it was
his clear intention that the public would not flag down or hail
a PHV erroneously believing it was a London taxi. As with the
Mercedes Vito range the ‘Eurobus’ vehicle is used in London
and widely throughout the UK both as a taxi and PHV. It is
not configured as a London Taxi and would not meet the
Metropolitan conditions of fitness, especially as it has a front
passenger seat.
These vehicles are also used by the general public and in
particular many local authorities and community transport
services, for special needs and disabled passenger transport
because of their ability to transport wheelchair bound
passengers easily.
Whilst the seating configuration might be similar it is
certainly not the same as a London taxi and there is
absolutely nothing externally that would mislead the
travelling public into hailing such a vehicle. London Taxis
have very distinctive markings, a meter that can be easily
seen from the road side, TfL green / yellow badge stickers,
an illuminated ‘for hire / taxi’ roof light sign and of course a
large plate on the rear with the TfL licensing details on it.
PHVs deliberately have different signage.
The particular vehicle that has been failed has been used
for private hiring for pre-booked journeys and has been
in my view correctly licensed for several years. In spite of
the London Taxi industries misguided belief that they own
the word ‘taxi’, they don’t, it’s an international term and
every PHV in London and elsewhere in the UK is in fact
a taxi under world-wide and Oxford dictionary definitions.
The word ‘taxi’ on the registration document does not
contravene the 98 Act, as it applies to advertising.
As this vehicle is now off the road at great cost to our
member and other PHV Operators and drivers in London are
using these vehicles (in some cases to transport very high
profile disabled passengers) may I politely suggest that the
decision not to test this vehicle is immediately rescinded
and an urgent appointment to re-licence is facilitated.
Sir Peter Gill, who regularly requests the vehicle, contacted
LPHCA to express his fury at the TfL TPH decision
56 | Private Hire News | ISSUE 77 | SPRING 2017
www.privatehirenews.co.uk | [email protected] |
@privatehirenews
What’s going On? TfL TPH Problems
TfL TPH kindly reviewed the issue and confirmed:
That it had been licensed for 2 years previously but stated
‘That in Feb 2017 it was ‘refused a licencing inspection
as the examiner raised the interior configuration as
being similar to taxi and on inspection of V5 document
confirmed that body type was designated as Taxi’ but
also said ‘Clearly, this type of vehicle is used throughout
the UK as a taxi (usually badged as an E7) but it is also
used as a PHV, some of which are wheelchair accessible,
such as this one.
The interior design of the passenger compartment of
this vehicle is very similar to that of a London taxi,
the configuration of the seating, wheelchair position,
partition (on some models) etc, are all redolent of a
licensed London taxi. This configuration, coupled with a
V5 document which designates the vehicle body type as
a taxi, led us, not unreasonably, to the conclusion that
this is indeed a taxi.
In conclusion, I think it fair to say that we support
wheelchair accessible vehicles such as this being
licensed as a private hire vehicle in London, however
we cannot do so if the EU vehicle type approval
documentation or DVLA V5 document designate the
vehicle as a taxi. We accept in this instance that the
type approval documentation for this model of vehicle
states Eurobus Tepee, however, the DVLA V5 document
states that the body type is ‘Taxi’.
Any change to the D5 section of the V5 document,
‘Body Type’, is a notifiable change to the DVLA. I suggest
that the owner of this vehicle makes an application to
the DVLA to amend the V5 to reflect the type approval
documentation, or, alternatively, request that Cab Direct
apply directly to the DVLA on the owner’s behalf if that is
the quicker route to resolution.
Once this change to the V5 has been made we will then
allow the licensing application to go forward’.
In short the vehicle was not
re-licensed because:
a) a small area inside looks like
a taxi
Steve Wright wrote back and said:
‘Many thanks for the detailed response.
The bottom line is that the word ‘taxi’ on the V5 is
preventing this vehicle from being Privately Hired as a
PHV because of this world-wide generic term on the log
book. The model is called ‘Eurobus’ but that doesn’t make
it a bus of course.
Due to the impact on the disabled passengers that cannot
now be picked up in this vehicle, with regret I will have
to take this further. I appreciate what the Act says, as I
worked closely with Sir George, the DfT and the PCO on the
drafting. I also know that it wasn’t Sir George’s intention to
inadvertently impact negatively against disabled passengers
and the drafting was minded to prevent illegal street hiring,
which of course the internal seat configuration, will not ‘aid
and abet’.
I will leave it to others to decide if the prevention of
licensing is ‘reasonable’ or ‘unreasonable’ and once again
thank you for your kind assistance’.
For the record, the Senior Officials at TfL TPH were
extremely helpful and set out the policy clearly, however in
our view ‘common sense’ should have prevailed and by not
testing the vehicle no ‘right of appeal’ was afforded. Again
in fairness to those helpful officials, it was explained that by
not testing the vehicle the owner could apply for a refund
but that in our view was not the reason for refusal of a test,
petty bureaucracy was, because the driver was not told
about the possibility of a refund at the time.
We have included some images of the vehicle and one
of the wheelchair passengers who regularly requests
this vehicle, Sir Peter Gill, who has kindly agreed to be
photographed in it.
Sir Peter telephoned Steve Wright to express his fury at
the decision not to re-licence or consider the vehicle for
re-licensing until the V5 registration document is changed.
He told Steve that this particular vehicle is the most
comfortable one for him and that he was dismayed at
what has happened, he also said he would be prepared
to support our quest to prevent this type of thing happening
to others.
LPHCA
COMMENT
b) the registration document
had the word ‘taxi’ on it
As previously stated, PHVs are a form of ‘taxi’ throughout
the UK and worldwide, the London Taxi (correctly known as
a ‘Hackney Carriage’) is probably more distinctive than most
Taxis around the world and the difference between the two is
obvious in our view and we believe there are not many people
who would confuse the PHV concerned with a Taxi.
vehicle, the chances of confusing this PHV for a Taxi are at best
negligible.
It is about time this type of petty bureaucracy is stopped and
the needs of passengers, especially wheelchair-bound ones,
are put first.
As the vehicle does not have the word ‘taxi’ on the doors, a TfL
approved meter, a TfL approved Credit Card terminal, a roof
sign, a separated compartment for the meter and luggage,
TfL taxi stickers and TfL taxi plates inside and outside the
At the time this magazine had gone to press, we did not know
how long it would take to get the word taxi removed from the
registration document but meanwhile the company cannot use
their specialist vehicle and passengers like Sir Peter Gill cannot
be transported in it. How sad! We will be doing everything in
our power to address this problem.
www.privatehirenews.co.uk | [email protected] |
@privatehirenews Private Hire News | ISSUE 77 | SPRING 2017 | 57