Agenda Document Pack - Regulatory Functions Board - 19/08/2026
Renfrewshire Council · 19 August 2026
Back to Regulatory Functions Board — 19 August 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
11/08/2026 Notice of Meeting and Agenda Regulatory Functions Board Date Time Venue Wednesday, 19 August 2026 10:00 Council Chambers (Renfrewshire), Council Headquarters, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley, PA1 1AN Membership Councillor John McNaughtan (Convener): Councillor Cathy McEwan (Depute Convener): Councillor Audrey Doig: Councillor Neill Graham: Councillor Lisa-Marie Hughes: Councillor Bruce MacFarlane: Councillor Janis McDonald: Councillor Kevin Montgomery: Councillor Sam Mullin: Councillor Andy Steel: Hybrid Meeting Please note that this meeting is scheduled to be held in the Council Chambers. However, it is a hybrid meeting and arrangements have been made for Elected Members only to join the meeting remotely should they wish. Applicants who have been should attend in person. Further Information This is a meeting which is open to members of the public. A copy of the agenda and reports for this meeting will be available for inspection prior to the meeting at the Customer Service Centre, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley and online at http://renfrewshire.cmis.uk.com/renfrewshire/CouncilandBoards.aspx For further information, please email democratic-services@renfrewshire.gov.uk Members of the Press and Public - contact details Members of the press and public wishing to attend the meeting should contact democratic- services@renfrewshire.gov.uk to allow the necessary arrangements to be made. MARK CONAGHAN Head of Corporate Governance Page 1 of 32
Page 2
11/08/2026 Meeting Recordings The meeting can be viewed via the undernoted links: https://youtu.be/bFG-EOcDn-0 https://youtu.be/BtUeGqs-v_M Page 2 of 32
Page 3
11/08/2026 Items of business Apologies Apologies from members. Declarations of Interest and Transparency Statements Members are asked to declare an interest or make a transparency statement in any item(s) on the agenda and to provide a brief explanation of the nature of the interest or the transparency statement. 1 Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982: Review of Taxi Fares within Renfrewshire Report by Director of Finance & Resources. 5 - 32 2 Grant of Short-term Let Licence Submit the undernoted application:- Brian Cunningham - RN00180N Exclusion of Press and Public The Board may by resolution exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business as it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that if members of the press and public are present, there could be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 7A of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973. 3 Exemption from Mobility Assistance Duties and Renewal of Taxi Operator’s Licence Submit the undernoted applications:- (a) Andrew Barr – T2450 (b) Andrew Barr – TX169 4 Surrender & Reissue of Taxi Operator’s Licence Submit the undernoted application:- James Liddell to Safdar Hussain – TX134 5 Landlord Registration Submit the undernoted application:- Barry Wilson - 578424-350-29081 Page 3 of 32
Page 4
11/08/2026 6 Grant of Late Hours Catering Licence Submit the undernoted application:- Pizza Glasgow Limited 7 Grant of Private Hire Car Operator’s Licence Submit the undernoted application:- Avinash Palattiyil Paul Adjournment The Board will adjourn following consideration of application 8(f) and reconvene at 1.30 pm. 8 Grant of Private Hire Car Drivers’ Licences Submit the undernoted applications:- (a) Mark Bolger (b) Mohammad Wali Arman (c) Declan Lappin (d) Said Lamime (e) Rafaqat Hussain (f) Yassin Ginawi (g) Danyal Amini (h) Harem Saeed (i) Ibrahim Almaszada (j) Zakerullah Adel (k) Dilman Mohammed Abdullah (l) Abdul Rahim Rahmani (m) Aymen Hassan (n) Mahmood Katreeb (o) Hossain Nikouei (p) Mohammad Tawab Zeyar (q) Maksym Huslavskyi (r) Roman Kuziv (s) Hasib Ullah Aymaq (t) Bilal Ahmad 9 Hearings into Possible Suspension or Revocation of Private Hire Car Drivers’ Licences Consider the possible suspension or revocation of the undernoted licences:- (a) Hugh Crawford – P1008 (b) Adeyemi Michael Adekanmbi – P1288 (c) Jama Farah – P1293 Page 4 of 32
Page 5
___________________________________________________________________ To: Regulatory Functions Board On: 19 August 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Director of Finance and Resources ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982: Review of Taxi Fares within Renfrewshire ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 At a meeting of the Regulatory Functions Board on 4th June 2026, there was submitted a report by the Director of Finance and Resources relative to the review of taxi fares applying within Renfrewshire. 1.2 At that meeting the Board agreed, after considering responses to an initial consultation, to advertise a proposal to fix a new fare scale. The agreed proposal involved: (a) an increase in the Flag Fall from £4.35 to £4.80; (b) an increase in the additional distance charge, by retaining the unit charge of 30p but changing the measure of distance from 252 yards to 228 yards; (c) an increase in the waiting time charge from 45p to 50p, based on the existing unit of 2 minutes (or part of that period); (d) various changes to the additional charges on the existing tariff, including: (i) a change to the charge for passengers in excess of four passengers from 75p to be replaced with Tariff 2 (add 1/3 to fare where 5 or more passengers); (ii) increases in the existing late night charges from £2.00 to £2.20 and from £2.45 to £2.70, respectively; and (iii) an increase in the additional charges during the festive period from £1.25 to £1.40. The agreed proposal also included an increase in the Glasgow Airport pick up and drop off charge from £5.50 to £7 and the removal of the existing shared hire provision from the existing fares Item 1 Page 5 of 32
Page 6
card. The Board agreed that the proposed scale would be advertised, allowing representations to be made within one month. 1.3. The Board agreed a proposed date of 12th of October 2026 for the proposed fare scale to come into effect. The Board also agreed that a report would be submitted to a future meeting of the Board to allow a taxi fare scale to be fixed. 1.4. An advertisement detailing the proposal was advertised in the press on 3rd July 2026 and provided that any person wishing to make representations on the proposal must do so in writing no later than 3rd August 2026. The advertised proposal is attached at Appendix 1 to this report. The procedure followed as detailed above is set out in Section 17 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, as amended (“the Act”). 1.5 In response to the advertisement, the following seven representations have been received: one from Renfrewshire Public Hire Association, the terms of which are set out fully at Appendix 2A and six from independent taxi operators based across both Glasgow Airport and the Gilmour Street taxi rank, which are set out fully at Appendices 2B to 2G. 1.6 Members may wish to note that in a recent appeal to the depute Traffic Commissioner involving the City of Edinburgh Council, the Depute Traffic Commissioner replaced the existing fixed airport charge with the following provision: “The prevailing Edinburgh Airport drop-off or pick- up charge as set by Edinburgh Airport at that time”. 1.7 The Board now requires to fix a taxi fare scale for Renfrewshire. The Board is also required, under the Act, to determine a date for the scale to come into effect. It is recommended that the scale comes into effect on 12th October 2026, as previously proposed by the Board. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board:- 2.1.1 Agree a new fares scale for Renfrewshire, either in accordance with the advertised scale as described in paragraph 1.2 of, and Appendix 1 to, this report, or such other scale as the Board thinks appropriate, having considered the representations received; Page 6 of 32
Page 7
2.1.2 Determine that this fares scale shall come into effect on 12th October 2026; 2.1.3 Thereafter, authorise officers to give notice to (a) all operators of taxis operating in Renfrewshire and (b) the persons and organisations appearing to the Board to be representative of the operators of taxis operating within Renfrewshire (being the parties initially consulted) of the fares scale fixed and its effect, the date on which it is to come into effect and the rights of appeal against the scale, all as set out in Section 17 of the Act, as amended; 2.1.4 Authorise officers to publish the fares scale, as soon as practicable following expiry of the period for appeal to the Traffic Commissioner (or, if appealed, as soon as practicable after determination of the appeal), by giving notice of the scales in an advertisement in a newspaper circulating in Renfrewshire and to specify therein that the scales shall come into effect on 12th October 2026 (or on such other date agreed by the Board), all in terms of Section 18A of the Act. _________________________________________________________ 3. Background 3.1 Section 17 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, as amended, requires the Council as licensing authority to fix maximum fares for the hire of taxis. A copy of the Board’s existing fare scale is attached at Appendix 3. Prior to fixing a new taxi fare scale, the Council requires to review the scales, by formally consulting taxi operators (or persons or organisations representative of them) and thereafter proposing new scales, and to publish these in a newspaper circulating in its area. The report to the Board on 4th June 2026 detailed the initial consultation which had taken place with organisations representative of the taxi trade within Renfrewshire. 3.2 Two proposals were received in response to the initial statutory consultation, details of which were set out in Paragraphs 3.4.1 to 3.4.2 of the report to the Board on 4th June 2026. 3.3 The Board agreed on 4th June 2026 to propose a fares scale for consultation as outlined in Paragraph 1.2 of this report. The advertisement which thereafter publicised the proposed scale on 3rd July 2026 stated that any representations would require to be made by 3 August 2026. The representation received within that period following upon the advertisement is detailed above at Paragraph 1.5. The Board will require to consider the terms of the representation before fixing a new taxi fares scale. Page 7 of 32
Page 8
3.4 The Board now requires to fix a new taxi fares scale for Renfrewshire and to determine the date the scale is to come into effect. The Board agreed on 4th June 2026, for the purpose of advertising the proposed scale, a proposed date of 12th October 2026 for the scale coming into effect. 3.5 Information regarding levels of inflation and information about, and links to, the relevant Circular and Best Practice Guidance were included in the report to the Board on 4th June 2026. Updated information regarding current levels of inflation is now available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/cons umerpriceinflation/june2026 Page 8 of 32
Page 9
___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial - There will be some costs associated with production of new fare scales, cards and advertising costs which will require to be met from existing budgets. 2. HR & Organisational Development - Nil. 3. Community/Council Planning – • Our Renfrewshire is safe – the continued monitoring of taxi licensing contributes to safer communities. 4. Legal - A licensing authority must fix scales for the fares and other charges in relation to the hire of a taxi within 18 months beginning with the date on which the last scales came into effect. Prior to fixing those scales, the licensing authority must consult with the operators of taxis in its area (or persons or organisations representative of them), review the existing scales and propose new ones, publish these in a local newspaper and consider any representations made on or before the date specified in the advertisement Once the Board has fixed scales as recommended in this report, the Council requires to give notice within seven days to the operators of taxis and also to those persons representative of them (as initially consulted) of the scale and its effect, the date on which the scale is to come into effect and the rights of appeal to the Traffic Commissioner. Any operator of a taxi or person or organisation appearing to the Traffic Commissioner to be representative of operators may, within fourteen days of the above notification of the scales being fixed, appeal the decision to the Traffic Commissioner for the Scottish Traffic Area. Following this 14 day appeal period (or the conclusion of an appeal to the Traffic Commissioner), the Council requires to give notice of the scale by newspaper advertisement. 5. Property/Assets – Nil. 6. Information Technology - Nil 7. Equality & Human Rights - The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report because it Page 9 of 32
Page 10
seeks a review only of taxi fares, which the Council has a statutory duty to carry out at regular intervals. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety - Nil 9. Procurement – Nil 10. Risk - Nil 11. Privacy Impact - Nil 12. Climate Risk – Nil. The report recommends that the Board agree maximum fares for taxis licensed to operate in Renfrewshire following upon a statutory review. No significant impacts are likely to arise from the introduction of the proposed scale. 13. Children’s Rights - the recommendations in the report are not considered to be incompatible with the UNCRC. 14. Cosla Policy Position – Nil _______________________________________________________ List of Background Papers None ___________________________________________________________________ Author: Douglas Campbell, Managing Solicitor (Licensing) douglas.campbell@renfrewshire.gov.uk 0141-487-1096 Page 10 of 32
Page 11
APPENDIX 1 Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 Taxi Fares Scale NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN in accordance with the provisions of Section 17 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 that Renfrewshire Council proposes to fix a new taxi fares scale as follows: TARIFF FARES BY DISTANCE Minimum fare for a distance not exceeding ½ mile...............................................£4.80 For each additional 228 yards or part thereof..........................................................30p FARES FOR WAITING TIME For each period of 2 minutes or part thereof...........................................................50p EXTRAS Where in excess of four passengers are carried the fare chargeable shall be ………….……………………………..normal fare plus 1/3 (Tariff 2) (applicable to 5 or more passenger taxis) An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight and before 5.00am Sunday to Thursday..............................................................................................................£2.20 An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight and before 5.00am Friday and Saturday................................................................................£2.70 Glasgow Airport pick up and drop off charge............................................................£7 An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight on 24 December until midnight on 26 December and from midnight on 31 December until midnight on 2 January.......................................................£1.40 From midnight on 24 December until midnight on 26 December the fare chargeable shall be......…………………………………......normal fare plus 1/3 (Tariff 2) From midnight on 31 December until midnight on 2 January the fare chargeable shall be………………………………..………...normal fare plus 1/3 (Tariff 2) SOILING FEE Soiling in this context includes any soiling by means of food, drink, vomit, urine or excrement.................................................up to a maximum of £100.00 FARES TO PLACES BEYOND THE RENFREWSHIRE AREA BOUNDARY The driver is not obliged to accept the hire. Any hire terminating outwith the Renfrewshire Area will be charged at a rate to be agreed at the time of hire. Page 11 of 32
Page 12
The effect of the above proposal is, firstly, to increase the Flag Fall (minimum fare) from £4.35 to £4.80. Secondly, the proposal is to increase the additional distance charge by retaining the unit charge of 30p but applying it to a reduced distance of 228 yards. Thirdly, the proposal would increase the current waiting time charge for each 2 minutes (or part thereof) from 45p to 50p. The proposal would also increase: the additional passenger charge (currently 75p per additional passenger) by replacing this charge with a charge of fare plus a third (Tariff 2), where more than four passengers are carried; the additional charge for journeys between midnight and 5am Sunday to Thursday nights from £2 to £2.20; the additional charge for journeys between midnight and 5am Friday and Saturday nights from £2.45 to £2.70; the Glasgow Airport pick up and drop off charge from £5.50 to £7; and the additional charges applicable between 24th - 26th December and 31st December - 2nd January from £1.25 to £1.40. The proposal also would remove the existing charges for a taxi hired on a shared basis between a number of hirers which have previously been defined according to the point of additional hires during a journey. It is proposed that the above fares scale will come into effect on 12 October 2026. Any person wishing to make representations in relation to the above proposals must do so in writing to the undernoted address no later than 3rd August 2026 Mark Conaghan Head of Corporate Governance Renfrewshire Council Renfrewshire House Cotton Street Paisley PA1 1TT Or by email to: licensing.cs@renfrewshire.gov.uk Published 3rd July 2026 Page 12 of 32
Page 13
APPENDIX 2A To whom it may concern, On behalf of our Association we would like to thank the Regulatory Functions Board for giving consideration to our response at a recent meeting to determine a new Taxi Fare Scale. We have two issues that we would like to raise for your consideration. ISSUE 1. Glasgow Airport Pick-up and Drop-off charge. As you are aware we have asked that the wording on the Tariff Card be such that any future increase applied to this charge by Glasgow Airport can be collected by the Taxi driver at its point of implementation. In a recent Legal ruling by the Deputy Traffic Commissioner in relation to Edinburgh Airports pick-up and drop-off charge as it appears on Edinburgh Council's Taxi Fare Scale, the Deputy Traffic Commissioner ruled that the previous wording which capped what drivers could recover from passengers has to be removed and replaced with wording that allows drivers to automatically recover the current charge and any future increases set by Edinburgh Airport. The Deputy Traffic Commissioner recognised that it would be unreasonable for Taxi drivers to continually absorb these Commercial increases. Importantly no criticism was made of Edinburgh City Council as any increase to this charge by the Airport would leave both the Council and the Taxi Trade in an impossible position as these increases are not synchronised with Taxi Fare Scale Reviews. In light of this we are confident that if asked, the Deputy Traffic Commissioner would reiterate the Legal Ruling in respect of Glasgow Airports Pick-up and Drop-off charge on the Renfrewshire Taxi Fare Scale. We therefore ask that the wording that we put forward in our original proposal be adopted so as to accomodate any future increases to this charge. Please find attached the Deputy Traffic Commissioners Ruling. ISSUE 2. Festive Period Extras where in excess of Four passengers are carried. We ask that a specific Tariff 3 be introduced to the Tariff Card which equates to Tariff 2 plus 1/3 which can only be utilised by Taxis capable of being hired to carry 5,6 or 7 passengers from midnight on 24th December until midnight 26th December and from midnight on 31st December until midnight on 2nd January which equates to normal fare plus 1/3 for hires of this nature on these specific dates. We respectfully ask that the Regulatory Functions Board give consideration to the issues that we raise in this Representation. Respectfully REDACTED Renfrewshire Public Hire Association. Page 13 of 32
Page 14
TAXI FARE SCALE APPEAL UNDER THE CIVIC GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1982 DECISION BY HUGH J. OLSON DEPUTY TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER FOR SCOTLAND IN THE TAXI FARE SCALE APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION MADE BY CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL BY KEVIN WOOD AND OTHERS APPELLANT AGAINST CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL RESPONDENTS 1. The appeal is an appeal against the decision of the Respondents’ Regulatory Committee on 11 May 2026. The appeal depends upon whether or not a change in circumstances within hours of the decision, Edinburgh Airport deciding increase the charge for taxis using the charged Pick-up and Drop-off Zone located in the ground floor of the multi-storey car park outside the Terminals from £6 to £8.50, means that I should alter the Taxi Fare Scale to take account of that change. Page 14 of 32
Page 15
2 2. I have decided that I should allow the appeal and alter the taxi fare scale by deleting the words “The amount charged at the exit gate subject to a maximum of £7.00, providing it is not more than the actual amount charged”, and substituting “The prevailing Edinburgh Airport drop-off or pick-up charge as set by Edinburgh Airport at that time”. 3. I have set out my reasons below. Background 4. Edinburgh Airport charge drivers, including taxis, for the use of the Pick-up and Drop-Off Zone at Edinburgh Airport. The Pick-up and Drop-Off Zone is just across from the terminal. If drivers do not want to pay the charge then there is a free pick up and drop of zone which is about a 10 minute walk away from the terminals. The practice of airports charging for drop off and pick up is longstanding. It raises revenue for the airport. The amount of the charge is a commercial decision for the airport. 5. Previous taxi fare scales have allowed taxi drivers to charge an extra payment to recover some or all of the charge, described in the Fare Table for Taxis as “The Airport Extra”. It is payable when a passenger is dropped off at the Pick-Up and Drop-Off Zone and the driver has explained to the passenger before the start of the journey that, among other things, there is a charge for this. 6. In the taxi fare table that is the subject of this appeal it is described as “The amount charged at the gate subject to a maximum of £6.00, providing it is no more than the actual amount charged.” 7. On 11 May 2026 the Respondent’s Regulatory Committee decided to increase the Airport Extra from £6.00 to £7.00. 8. Because of Edinburgh Airport’s decision to increase the charge to £8.50 means that there will be a shortfall of £1.50 per journey to the Pick-Up and Page 15 of 32
Page 16
3 Drop-Off Zone between the amount a taxi driver will have to pay to drop off a passenger in the Zone and the amount that can be recovered from the passenger. 9. Edinburgh Airport’s decision triggered the lodging of appeals by Kevin Wood, in his capacity of chairman of Central Radio Taxis (Tollcross) Ltd, Gary Thomson, a taxi operator, Jonny Bates, taxi operator, Jamie Stalker, taxi operator, David Baird, taxi operator, David Horsburgh, Clerk of the Association of Hackney Drivers of the City of Edinburgh, Keith Auld, branch activist for Unite the Union Edinburgh Taxi Branch, Imran Saeed, company secretary of City Cabs Edinburgh Ltd. Those appellants who were acting in a representative capacity were asked to provide details of which individual operators they were representing. I am satisfied that the appeals are lodged by or on behalf of persons who are representative of a substantial proportion of the operators of taxis operating in the area of the City of Edinburgh Council taxi licensing area. The law 10. The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 provides:- “17.— Taxi fares. (1) The fares for the hire of taxis in any area and all other charges in connection with the hire of a taxi or with the arrangements for its hire shall be not greater than those fixed for that area under this section and section 18 of this Act. (2) The licensing authority must fix scales for the fares and other charges mentioned in subsection (1) within 18 months beginning with the date on which the scales came into effect. (3) In fixing scales under subsection (2), the licensing authority may— (a) alter fares or other charges, (b) fix fares or other charges at the same rates… Page 16 of 32
Page 17
4 18.- Appeals in respect of taxi fares (1) Any person mentioned in subsection (1A) may, within 14 days of notice being given under section 17(4C), appeal against those scales to the traffic commissioner for the Scottish Traffic Area as constituted for the purpose of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981. (1A) Those persons are— (a) any person who operates a taxi in an area for which scales have been fixed under section 17(2), and (b) any person or organisation appearing to the traffic commissioner to be representative of such taxi operators… (3) On an appeal under subsection (1) above, the traffic commissioner may— (a) confirm or alter the scales; or (b) decline to proceed— (i) at any stage in the appeal, if he considers the case for the appellant is not representative of the view of a substantial proportion of the operators of taxis operating in the area of the licensing authority; (ii) if less than two years have elapsed since he decided an appeal against a decision of the same authority in respect of the same scale, and he considers it inappropriate that he should consider the matter again. The Licensing and Regulation of Taxis (Appeals in Respect of Taxi Fares) (Scotland) Order 1985 No. 2025 11. The 1985 Regulations provide:- “5.(2) Except as otherwise provided in these rules, the procedure shall Page 17 of 32
Page 18
5 be such as the traffic commissioner shall at his discretion determine… (3) The traffic commissioner may receive oral, documentary or other evidence of any fact which appears to him to be relevant to the appeal, notwithstanding that such evidence would be inadmissible in a court of law… (7) Except with leave of the traffic commissioner and after consideration by him of any representations to the contrary effect which may be made by or on behalf of any party to the hearing, a party shall not be entitled to advance evidence which was not before the licensing authority when the decision appealed against was made.” 12. In this case all of the appeals are based upon evidence of Edinburgh Airport’s new charge of £8.50 which was not before the Respondent’s Regulatory Committee. 13. The first issue for me is to decide whether or not I should grant the Appellants’ leave to rely upon this new evidence in terms of Regulation 5(7). 14. I have considered the Respondent’s submissions. The Respondent’s position is that I should disregard the new evidence and that:- “29…the appropriate way to proceed in circumstances where there has been a change in the circumstances relevant to a decision such as this is for the Council, if considered appropriate, to engage the statutory procedures for review contained withing section 17(2)-(5) of the 1982 Act…” 15. I do not agree. In this case both the Respondent and the taxi trade were aware that an increase in Edinburgh Airport’s charge for the Pick-up and Drop-off Zone was imminent. Both the Respondent and the taxi trade made repeated requests to Edinburgh Airport for information about the increase. Edinburgh Airport chose not to provide this information. The Respondent, and the taxi trade, were left in the unsatisfactory position of suspecting that an increase was imminent but not knowing what that increase would be. Page 18 of 32
Page 19
6 16. The Respondent, because it did not know what the increase would be, consulted on a proposal that the new Table of Fees should allow the taxi driver to charge “[T]he amount charged at the exit gate subject to a maximum of £7.00, providing it is not more than the actual amount charged”. 17. It is difficult to see a rational basis on which the Respondent, if it had been aware of Edinburgh Airport’s actual increase, could have refused to allow recovery of £8.50, as it was agreeable in principle to the recovery of the actual amount charged (which it expected to be less than £7.00). 18. The Respondent clearly expected that the increase would not exceed £7.00. It is reasonable to infer that if the Respondent had been aware that the increase was going to be £8.50 it would have allowed recovery of £8.50 rather than £7.00. 19. I should make it clear that I make no criticism of the Respondent (nor do the Appellants). The Respondent attempted to deal with a difficult situation by estimating what it thought was the maximum that Edinburgh Airport would charge. Unfortunately, the Respondent did not guess correctly. I do not understand why Edinburgh Airport were not prepared to share this information, or at the very least the date and time on which the information would be published so that the Respondent could take account of the actual increase that Edinburgh Airport planned. It is, after all, in Edinburgh Airport’s interest that taxi drivers should be prepared to use the Pick-up and Drop-off Area, and therefore pay the increased charge to Edinburgh Airport. Taxi drivers are likely to be reluctant to do so if they cannot recover the actual charge that they incur. 20. If I refuse to allow the Appellant’s to rely upon the new evidence of the actual level of the proposed charge, then there would be no basis for altering the proposed taxi fare scale as approved by the Regulatory Committee of the Respondent. Page 19 of 32
Page 20
7 21. The effect of this would be that taxi operators would have to absorb the shortfall in the charge of £1.50. It seems reasonable to me to infer from the information in the appeals that if this is the case there will be a number of taxi operators who will decline to take passengers to the Pick-up and Drop-off Area, as they are entitled to do. The driver might either refuse the fare completely, or the driver might take the passenger to the free drop off, which is some distance from the terminal. This will mean that some passengers will find it more difficult to get a taxi to Edinburgh Airport or that they will be dropped off at a more inconvenient place. If taxi operators do absorb the shortfall, then this will decrease the profitability of serving Edinburgh Airport, making it a less desirable fare, and it may reduce the availability of taxis to serve Edinburgh Airport. 22. The Respondent suggests the appeal should be refused and the shortfall could be dealt with by the usual process of review of taxi fares under s.17 of the 1982 Act. The problem with this is it would result in delay from following the statutory procedures. While I cannot say with any certainty what the outcome of a consultation process on removing the shortfall would be, it seems to me that if a s.17 review was carried out it would result in taxi drivers being able to recover the actual increase. It would simply delay the inevitable. 23. I have decided, therefore, to allow the new evidence of the actual increase to be considered in the appeal. 24. The Respondent does not argue that if this evidence is considered, an increase should not be allowed. The issue is then whether the increase should be to the new level of £8.50 or if I should amend the wording to “the prevailing Edinburgh drop-off or pick-up charge as set by Edinburgh Airport at that time, provided the amount charged does not exceed the actual airport fee in force”, as suggested by Mr Saeed, representing City Cabs Edinburgh Ltd, Mr Horsburgh, representing the Association of Hackney Carriage Drivers of the City of Edinburgh, Mr Auld representing Unite the Union – Edinburgh Taxi Branch, Jonathan Bates, Jamie Stalker and David Baird. Page 20 of 32
Page 21
8 25. I agree with the submission that amending the wording to avoid the need for a review of the taxi fare scale every time Edinburgh Airport changes its charge is a sensible way of proceeding. The current provision allows for the taxi operator to recover the actual amount of the charge subject to a cap of £7.00. There does not seem to me to be any reason why the cap should not be removed. The Edinburgh Airport charge is fixed by Edinburgh Airport. It is a charge which is publicised by Edinburgh Airport e.g. by signage at the Pick-up and Drop-off Zone, and on their website. It can be instantly verified by a taxi passenger who can check the signs or the website. If the taxi passenger does not wish to pay then the taxi passenger can be dropped off at the free pick up and drop off. The Respondent has no control over the timing of when Edinburgh Airport changes its charge. It would be inconvenient for the Respondent and the taxi trade if they had to follow the s.17 procedure every time there was a change in the charge. 26. Although I have decided the appeal on the basis of new evidence that was not before the Regulatory Committee, as the Respondent made submissions about the approach that a Traffic Commissioner should adopt in these kinds of appeals it may help if I indicate my views on those submissions. 27. The Respondent’s submissions can be summarised as the Traffic Commissioner should respect the Regulatory Committee’s decision unless it was ultra vires, or it was plainly incorrect or wrong. The Respondent relies upon the observations of Lord President Emslie in Wordie Property Co. Ltd v Secretary of State for Scotland 1984 SLT 345 at p.347, and Sheriff McSherry in Holmehill Ltd v Scottish Ministers 2006 SLT (Sh Ct) 79 about the tests to be applied in appeals to the Court of Session against planning decisions (see Wordie) and an appeal to the sheriff against a decision of the Scottish Ministers to refuse to register a community interest in land under s.621(2)(a) of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 (see Holmehill). 28. I do not agree that these cases are of any assistance in deciding which test that a Traffic Commissioner should apply in an appeal under s.18 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982. An appeal under s.18 is not a planning Page 21 of 32
Page 22
9 appeal. It is not an appeal by way of a summary application to the sheriff. It is not restricted to an appeal on a point of law. It is not a review of the Regulatory Committee’s decision. It would normally involve the hearing of evidence and a Traffic Commissioner is entitled to consider evidence that has been put before him or her, and which was not before the Regulatory Committee (see Regulation 5). 29. The Respondent relies upon Hughes v Hamilton District Council 1991 SC 251 as authority for the proposition that it was a matter for the Regulatory Committee to decided what weight should be attached to the material that was before it when it reached its decision. 30. I disagree. Hughes was an appeal to the Court of Session, under para. 18(12) of Schedule 1 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982, against an appeal to the sheriff under para 5 of Schedule 1:- “The sheriff may uphold an appeal under this paragraph only if he considers that the licensing authority, in arriving at their decision- (d) exercised their discretion in an unreasonable manner.” It was an appeal against an exercise of a discretion and on the ground that the discretion was exercised in an unreasonable manner. It has no relevance to a s.18 appeal which is not restricted to whether the Regulatory Committee exercised a discretion in an unreasonable manner. 31. I have found the observations of Lord Reed, sitting in the Supreme Court in the case of Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 60, [2016] 1 W.L.R. 4799 of assistance in considering how I should approach this appeal against the Regulatory Committee’s decision. Although that case involved an appeal in an immigration matter I consider that the Supreme Court’s observations apply to the nature of appellate decision-making in this case as well – see paragraphs 39 to 50 and in particular paragraph 45:- “…Where an appellate court or tribunal has to reach its own decision, after hearing evidence, it does not, in general, simply start afresh and disregard the decision under appeal…In a more recent licensing case, Page 22 of 32
Page 23
10 R (Hope and Glory Public House Ltd) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court…Toulson LJ put the matter in this way: ‘It is right in all cases that the magistrates’ court should pay careful attention to the reasons given by the licensing authority for arriving at the decision under appeal, bearing in mind that Parliament has chosen to place responsibility for making such decisions on local authorities. The weight which magistrates should ultimately attach to those reasons must be a matter for their judgment in all the circumstances, taking into account the fullness and clarity of the reasons, the nature of the issues and the evidence given on the appeal…’” 32. I have identified the following principles from Ali:- (1) A Traffic Commissioner has to reach his/her own decision after hearing evidence. (2) The Traffic Commissioner does not, in general, simply start afresh and disregard the decision under appeal. (3) The Traffic Commissioner should pay careful attention to the reasons given by the Licensing Committee for arriving at the decision to fix the scale of fares, bearing in mind that Parliament has chosen to place responsibility for making such decisions on Licensing Committees. (4) The weight which the Traffic Commissioner should ultimately place on the Licensing Committee’s reasons is a matter for the Traffic Commissioner’s judgment in all the circumstances, taking into account the fullness and clarity of the reasons, the nature of the issues and the evidence given on appeal. 33. In considering an appeal a Traffic Commissioner should have regard to 2.37 of Annex A to the Scottish Development Department Circular no.25/1986 which provides:- “2.37 The Secretary of State expects that in fixing fares authorities will want to pay primary regard to the costs incurred by the trade, having regard to capital costs (including interest payments) of the vehicles, the Page 23 of 32
Page 24
11 costs of maintaining and replacing them to the standards required by the licensing authority, the costs of employing drivers, and the prevailing levels of wages and costs in related road transport industries. In the Secretary of State’s view the public interest is better served by ensuring the maintenance of an adequate taxi service by giving the trade a fair return than by depressing fares for social reasons, however understandable. If fares are fixed at a level higher than the market can stand, the trade is free to reduce them.” 34. As the Respondent’s Regulatory Committee did not consider the new charge imposed by Edinburgh Airport, it follows that as I have decided to consider this new evidence, the Regulatory Committee’s decision on different evidence is of limited assistance to me. I should make it clear that I do not criticise the Regulatory Committee’s decision on the evidence that was available to it. It is unfortunate that Edinburgh Airport did not comply to requests from the Regulatory Committee (and the taxi trade) to provide that information. Hugh J. Olson Deputy Traffic Commissioner for Scotland 7 July 2026 Page 24 of 32
Page 25
APPENDIX 2B Urgent Representation: Request for Immediate Tariff Card Amendment – REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Dear Members of the Licensing Committee / Trade Representation Team, I am writing to you as an experienced professional driver of 14 years, operating under vehicle plate number REDACTED, to formally lodge an urgent complaint regarding the current airport drop-off surcharge on the taxi tariff card. The existing 18-month fare review schedule locks the airport passenger drop-off allowance at £5.50. However, the current terminal signage at Glasgow Airport clearly states that the express drop-off charge is now £7.00. This mismatch is creating an unsustainable and unfair financial penalty for frontline operators, particularly during this peak holiday season for flyers. I wish to submit the following details for your immediate attention: First, because I, REDACTED, am legally prevented from charging the actual fee to the passenger, I am personally losing between £30 and £50 every single week just to drop passengers off at their departure terminal. Second, operating at a fixed deficit is deeply unjust. The airport operates as a private commercial entity and has the freedom to increase its tariff at any point. Forcing drivers to bear the brunt of these sudden hikes while bound by a rigid 18-month local authority schedule is entirely unviable. Third, we should operate under a rule where the visual airport charge is directly and seamlessly passed on to the passenger. I request that the wording on the tariff card be permanently amended from a fixed monetary cap to a dynamic clause stating: "Whatever the visual airport tariff dictates at the time of transit must be passed on directly to the passenger." With summer passenger numbers at their highest, this daily erosion of my earnings requires swift, exceptional intervention outside of the standard review cycle. Thank you for your immediate consideration and action on this matter. I look forward to your prompt response. Yours sincerely, REDACTED RED Professional Driver (14 Years Experience) Plate Number: REDACTED Page 25 of 32
Page 26
APPENDIX 2C From: REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2026 at 20:39 Subject: About my losses To: Renfrewshire Council <customerservice.licensing@renfrewshire.gov.uk> Dear Licensing Team, I am writing to submit a formal representation regarding the current 2026 taxi fare review, specifically concerning the fixed airport drop-off tariff. Under the current tariff card, operators are strictly tied to a fixed charge of £5.50 for airport drop-offs. Because the actual airport drop-off fees have increased, drivers are currently forced to lose £1.50 per job. During peak travel periods, this financial gap heavily impacts drivers, leading to individual losses of anywhere between £30 and £50 per week solely on airport drop-off runs. To create a fair and sustainable system for operators, I propose the following adjustments to the new tariff card: Remove Fixed Cash Amounts: The tariff card should not state a specific pound amount for airport drop-offs. Dynamic Signage Reference: The card should explicitly state that airport drop-off fees will be charged "as per the current signage at the airport drop-off zone." Future-Proof the Tariff: Airport parking authorities frequently adjust their access pricing. Leaving the monetary value off the tariff card ensures the council does not need to issue costly, premature reviews when airport fees change over the next 18 months. This minor wording amendment will protect local drivers from compounding weekly losses while ensuring passengers are charged transparently based on the airport's live operational fees. Thank you for considering Page 26 of 32
Page 27
APPENDIX 2D Following several discussions with the spiralling costs of running WAV vehicles especially in white if its not change of colour it’s the constant expense of keeping a wrapped vehicle’s tidy. On Saturday, our exhaust was damaged due to a speed bump over in priest hill area Glasgow. You will see below the cost of only a rear section of the replacement exhaust required below. This is due to being a WAV that has a bespoke exhaust and basically, they can charge what they like. This rear silencer is four times the cost of any standard estate or SUV. The time has come to really consider if hackney taxing is viable anymore and we as a group need to act. Things for the board to consider. 1) With the charge of the Airport barrier increase from the 1st of July local Tariff one hires the profit is non-existent example ( Gilmour St £12.25 /£12.45 depending on traffic ) £8.20 back to GLA / £0.50p on fuel wear and tear on vehicle clearing £ 3.45 who can sustain this with the running cost we face today due to the council rules & stipulations. We cannot understand as a group why the fare increase wasn’t brought in to match the airport rise, we now run for the next three months on tariff one making little to no money. 2) The increase in exempt drivers is in the increase, and the rules are seriously unfair 3) Private Hire pick up’s into GLA is getting less & less why ? they refuse to come in case the hire is not located, and they face the pickup drop off fee with no hire 4) The use of local hire tokens has increased considerably due this. 5) Many Owner drivers applying for extensions due to the increase costs to buy a WAV vehicle /many drivers are trying to buy vehicles that give an extra few years in the hope the rules change to allow normal vehicle’s back in service as Hackney’s. 6) Less & less 5 /6 seaters available for all the above reasons (Cost) 7) If the rules would change, we could then access white vehicles instantly this would allow us to run newer vehicles and save tens of thousands of pounds on the initial outlay & monthly running costs would be heavily reduced. 8) Older vehicles having to be tested every three months in nothing more than a money-making scheme from RDC / if DVLA require one test per annum on any age of vehicle then why does RDC need four ? RDC is forcing guys to run older vehicles due to all above. 9) The earning’s in this industry have changed so much and unfortunately in the next 12-18 months I think you will find people leave unless RDC listens and supports RDC Hackney Drivers . One more point WAV vehicles are purposely built to take disabled people to Tesco’s /schools runs etc, they are not built for commercial Hackney carriages the only Page 27 of 32
Page 28
vehicles that are built for this purpose LEVC’s , who can afford £75,000 /£80,000 ?. Back to my point standard vehicles would do the same job without the expense . REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Sent: 08 July 2026 14:40 To: REDACTED REDACTED Subject: Re: Exhaust Hi REDACTED, £846.40 + vat Thanks REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Page 28 of 32
Page 29
APPENDIX 2E From: REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Date: 30/07/2026 15:04 (GMT+00:00) To: licensing.cs@renfrewshire.go.uk Subject: Fare scale review REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Dear sir/madam I am writing about the fare scale review and I would like to put in an objection to part of new scale review in particular the airport charge of £7.00. We know that the fare scale review is done every 18 months so by the time the new tariff card comes out we will probably be behind again at a cost for the drivers. This week alone I have lost £15 due to tarifff card price of £5.50 this is not good business and not one person should make a loss at any time for doing their job. I would like to see the wording different no fixed price as other councils have done on their tariff cards . Aberdeen tariff card says on it drop off as per current barrier value according to local signage. Edinburgh has drop off charge and pick up charge as set by airports at the time on there tariff card. I can't see why renfrewshire council can not do this or something like it . REDACTED REDACTED Badge REDACTED Plate REDACTED Page 29 of 32
Page 30
APPENDIX 2F From: REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Sent: 31 July 2026 16:08 To: licensing.cs (CSAlias10) <licensing.cs@renfrewshire.gov.uk> Subject: Dear sir/madam Iam writing about the fare scale reviewand I wouldlike to put in an objection to part of the new scale review in particular the Airport Charge of £7.00. We know that the fare scale review is every 18 months so by the time the new tariff card comes out we will probably be behind again at a cost to all drivers again. This week alone I have lost £15.00 due to the tariff card reading a price of £5.50 for airport charge drop off charge so this is not good business and not one person should be making a loss at any time for doing there job. I would like to see the wording differently no fixed price as other councils have. Aberdeen tariff card says on it drop off as per current barrier value according to local signage. Edinburgh has drop off charge and pick up as set by airports at the time off dropping off . I can't see why Renfrewshire council can not do the same or something like it . Page 30 of 32
Page 31
APPENDIX 2G From: REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED Sent: 03 August 2026 06:59 To: licensing.cs (CSAlias10) <licensing.cs@renfrewshire.gov.uk> Subject: Taxi fare increase Morning REDACTED just about airport drop off charge.I think it should be worded with the fare increase when airports increase price taxi drivers should be able to increase prices according. GLASGOW Airport is our busiest destination and we are losing out £1.50p every time we drop off. Page 31 of 32
Page 32
APPENDIX 3 CIVIC GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1982 - TAXI FARES SCALE - TAXI No. TX001 With effect from 14 April 2025 TARIFF FARES BY DISTANCE Minimum fare for a distance not exceeding ½ mile ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..£4.35 For each additional 252 yards or part thereof…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………30p FARES FOR WAITING TIME For each period of 2 minutes or part thereof………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….45p EXTRAS For each passenger in excess of 4, a fifth passenger charge of …………………………………………………………………………………………..75p (applicable to 5,6, or 7 seater taxis) An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight and before 5.00am Sunday to Thursday……………………………………………£2.00 An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight and before 5.00am Friday and Saturday……………………………………………£2.45 Glasgow Airport Terminal pick up and drop off charge…………………………………………………………………………………………………….£5.50 An additional charge for journeys commencing after midnight on 24 December until midnight on 26 December and from midnight on 31 December until midnight on 2 January ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...£1.25 From midnight on 24 December until midnight on 26 December the fare chargeable shall be…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...normal fare plus 1/3 (Tariff 2) From midnight on 31 December until midnight on 2 January the fare chargeable shall be………………………..……..normal fare plus 1/3 (Tariff 2) SOILING FEE Soiling in this context includes any soiling by means of food, drink, vomit, urine or excrement…………………………. up to a maximum of £100.00 FARES TO PLACES BEYOND THE RENFREWSHIRE AREA BOUNDARY The driver is not obliged to accept the hire. Any hire terminating outwith the Renfrewshire Area will be charged at a rate to be agreed at the time of hire. Fares chargeable for journeys where a taxi is hired on an exclusive basis shall be charged in accordance with the normal fares scale determined by the Council, but shall be modified where a taxi is hired on a shared basis according to the number of hirers sharing the vehicle, as follows:- 1. One hirer: 100% of the fare 2. For two hirers: 100% of the first hirer to the point of the second hirer and thereafter both pay 75% of the standard fare each 3. If three hirers: As above to the point of the third hirer and thereafter all pay 65% of the standard fare each. 4. If four hirers: As above to the point of the fourth hirer and thereafter all pay 55% of the standard fare each. 5. If five hirers: As above to the point of the fifth hirer and thereafter all pay 50% of the standard fare each. 6. On departure from the taxi of one or more hirers the fare payable will revert to the rate appropriate to the remaining number of hirers. Director of Finance & Resources Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street Paisley, PA1 1TT Page 32 of 32