A huge hike in taxi fares of almost 27 per cent has been agreed in the Borders which will probably come into force in early February 2025..

Scottish Borders Council (SBC) reviews rates every 18 months, the last review took place in August 2019.

A formula to determine variations in taxi fares was agreed between the trade, the traffic commissioner and the local authority.

A further review was due to be held in 2021, however, operational pressures and the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic delayed it.

Discussions with taxi operators highlighted the financial pressures facing the sector due to increasing costs and delays associated with the review.

Operators are now reporting cost rises of around 144 per cent due to increased operational costs, including insurance, fuel and wages.

When members of SBC’s decision-making Executive Committee met on Tuesday 3 December, they agreed an increase of 26.7 per cent.

Members also endorsed a rise in the soiling charge from £70 to £100.

Kelso & District councillor Tom Weatherston “reluctantly” supported the huge hike, saying: “I think as a committee we are in a very difficult position today and to coin a phrase, we’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.

“I am very aware that taxi operators have been placed in a very difficult position. I spoke to one last night and he’s really struggling and he said without this rise he’ll probably fold.

“On the other had I can see the impact this will have on the public using the service, but if you haven’t got a taxi, you haven’t got a service anyway, so I’m reluctantly going to support this.”

Selkirkshire councillor Elaine Thornton-Nicol added: “I know people think taxis are very expensive but it is a privilege not a right. You don’t have a right to a taxi. It’s not a human right.

“We are now at a stage that we have artificially held quite frequently the levels of increase down. We all know how much fuel has gone up.”

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it

Aberdeen taxi drivers are set to benefit from a 3% fare increase, approved by city council leaders.

The decision comes in response to rising vehicle running costs, including fuel and repairs, as well as increased labour costs.

The move follows a review mandated every 18 months.

While the Taxi and Private Hire Consultation Group proposed a slightly higher 3.5% increase, along with a £1 night-time surcharge, the council opted for their own option.

The new fares, which will take effect in April, will mean passengers will pay the same price for a shorter distance, with extras like waiting charges and surcharges remaining unchanged.

The fare increase coincides with the recent launch of Uber in Aberdeen.

While the ride-hailing service has been welcomed by the council as a means to address taxi shortages, it has drawn criticism from local taxi drivers who hit out at alleged “mistruths” in the media aimed at “smearing” the trade as the problem, rather than the solution.

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it

A proposal to allow taxi drivers to use bus lanes along a key route in Reading has been turned down by the local council.

The A33 bus lanes, which run between Rose Kiln Lane and the M4 Junction 11, are designed to speed up public transport and potentially accommodate future tram services.

A petition signed by 231 people was submitted to the council's traffic management sub-committee by the Reading Taxi Association (RTA). It argued that taxis should be included as a form of public transport and granted access to the bus lanes.

The RTA's chairman, Asif Rashid, highlighted the importance of taxis for those unable to use other modes of transport and the potential for safer and more efficient journeys along the A33 corridor.

While Labour councillors sympathised with the petition, there was concern that allowing hackney carriages to use the bus lanes would jeopardise the prospect of a tram being introduced. 

The request was opposed by the council's highways team, which raised concerns that taxi drivers would swerve into regular traffic lanes to avoid buses stopping to pick up and drop off customers. 

Answering that point, Mr Rashid, chairman of the RTA said: "As professional drivers, we have shown through our continued use of other bus lanes that this is not the case.

"We act responsibly in shared spaces i.e. in all the other bus lanes, we have every other bus lane except for this one.

"Hackney carriages, by law, is a form of public transport. Our role is beyond simply moving passengers. Along the A33 corridor, there is a [Circle] Hospital there, there's businesses, there's leisure.

"The problem is that not everybody can use alternative modes of transport. We want to work safely along the A33 corridor.

"We've been trying to get this for years and every time we've been knocked back.

"By excluding hackney carriages, the council is inadvertently undermining the very objective it aims to achieve by reducing congestion, promoting sustainable transport and ensuring equitable access to mobility."

Cllr Rob White (Green, Park), the leader of the opposition, said: "I'd quite like a tram, but I don't see any indication that we've got one coming in the near future."

Ultimately, councillors rejected granting taxis access to the A33 bus lanes by a majority vote at the meeting on November 27. 

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it

Old taxis pumping out too much pollution will soon be banned from the streets of Greater Manchester – but the councils can’t force this on every cabbie. 

Rochdale Borough Council is the latest council to have approved plans to ban vehicles that don’t meet the Greater Manchester emissions standards by 31 December 2025. Diesel cars made before 2015 and petrol cars made before 2006 will no longer be allowed as taxis or private hire vehicles by the end of next year.

The aim of these changes is to reduce harmful roadside levels of nitrogen dioxide. 

For those unable to meet the new standards for financial reasons, a government fund of £30.5m is proposed to provide taxi upgrades.

However, councillors fear this change could have little impact on reducing emissions as a large number of private hire drivers, working for companies such as Uber, are actually licensed with non-Greater Manchester authorities.

The meeting of the council’s cabinet was told that drivers licensed elsewhere but operating across the region is an issue and that Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is pushing the government to change legislation on this. The officer added that City of Wolverhampton does have emissions standards in place – meaning some of their vehicles would meet Greater Manchester emissions standards.

Standards in the West Midlands authority say newly licensed cars can only be 12 years old and drivers renewing their licence can only have a car made as far back as 16 years ago.

Although the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) has an ambition to make sure every taxi and private hire vehicle in the region is licensed locally, they can’t enforce this. Currently, legislation allows licensed private hire drivers to operate anywhere in the country outside of London.

Andy Burnham has repeatedly stated he is confident more regulation will be brought in to curb the practice of out-of-area working. A spokesman for the GMCA previously said they are calling for a change in the law to clamp down on ‘out of town’ licensing.

There has been no movement so far on the issue by the Department for Transport.

A DfT spokesperson told the LDRS previously: “We are aware of the concerns around private hire vehicle licensing, including out-of-area working, and will be considering ways to support local authorities with the issue.”

A spokesperson for City of Wolverhampton Council previously said: “While City of Wolverhampton Council has never actively encouraged applications from drivers outside the city, existing legislation requires that if an application is submitted and requirements are met, then the application must be granted. The council may not refuse an applicant simply because they live in a different area.

“Applicants are usually local to the area they drive in, but many have chosen to be licensed in Wolverhampton due to our efficient, yet rigorous, licensing process.

"Public safety is of paramount importance to us. Partnership working with our licensing colleagues and other agencies shows our commitment to upholding our responsibilities; we expect drivers and vehicles licensed by us to always maintain the highest standards."

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it

An Ashford taxi driver has lost his appeal against the revocation of his taxi driver's licence by Ashford Borough Council.

Margate Magistrates' Court heard an appeal against the revocation on Friday 22 November 2024.

The court heard that the driver, Mr Tashil Hashemi, who had held a licence since 2011, had become the authority’s “most complained about driver”. 

Council representatives told the court that Mr Hashemi had a history of complaints and allegations made against him, including:

• rude and abusive language / behaviour towards customers, security staff on NHS premises, and civil enforcement officers,
• refusal of fares,
• poor driving standards, including driving without due care and attention,
• using a taxi rank as a parking space outside of a shop premises also occupied by the driver, and,
• obstructive behaviour towards licensing officers.

The council’s Regulatory Sub-Committee had therefore taken the decision, in January 2024, to revoke his driver’s licence.

The court heard that Mr Hashemi appealed against the council’s decision on the basis that he did not agree that he could not be considered ‘fit and proper’ to continue to hold a licence.

Mr Hashemi represented himself during the hearing, with assistance from a ‘McKenzie Friend’, a layperson who can offer practical support to the unrepresented litigant.

Mr Hasemi failed to convince the court that he should have been considered fit, with some of the behaviours, such as an attempt to prevent a duly-authorised licensing officer from inspecting his hackney carriage, being picked up by the District Judge.

In summing up, the Judge was complimentary of the investigation by the Ashford Borough Council Licensing team, the council’s processes in dealing with the case, and ultimately found that they too could not be satisfied that the driver was a ‘fit and proper’ person to hold a taxi driver’s licence. 

The court dismissed the appeal, with Mr Hashemi ordered to pay £4,000 costs to the council within 28 days.

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet about it