1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148 
When is a psv not a psv?
Page 41
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DoE admits licensing confusion
by Johnny Johnson
• A great deal of controversy has arisen among busmen following the answer to a query in the Question and Answer page (CM February 2) on the issue of driving a psv without a psv driving licence when it is not carrying passengers. Because it has been the practice for fitters and others to drive public service vehicles without carrying passengers, most busmen argue that it is lawful to do so.
One reader has written (CM last week) to say that his son, summoned in 1968 for driving a 12-seater minibus back to its depot after repair, was acquitted of any offence after six weeks' deliberation by a magistrates' court. Nevertheless, though this might be quoted as a precedent, there is no guarantee that another magistrates' court would take the same view.
The whole argument rests on the supposition that a psv is not so classified when it is not carrying passengers. But what does the law say?
The definition of public service vehicles is contained in Section 117 of the Road Traffic Act 1960. This states that "For the purposes of this Act, a public service vehicle is a motor vehicle used for carrying passengers for hire and reward which either — (a) is carrying passengers at separate fares, or (b) is not carrying passengers at separate fares but is adapted to carry eight or more passengers."
The vehicle is described as "a motor vehicle used for carrying passengers". If it was intended that only a vehicle carrying passengers could be classified as a psv then the words "used for" would be superfluous.
Sub-paragraph (a) is plain enough but the second significant point occurs in (b). At first sight it appears that implicit in the sentence is the understanding that while the vehicle is not carrying passengers at separate fares it might be carrying them at one bulk fare as in a contract carriage operation.
If this was the intention, however, I suggest that the paragraph would have read: "is carrying passengers not at separate fares". It is difficult to believe that the Parliamentary draughtsmen would not have realized the significance of the relative positions of the negative.
Consider also the registration and excise licence of a psv. On the latter count alone, it would seem likely that a driver, stopped by the police, who stated that the vehicle he was driving was not a psv at that moment, could be prosecuted for driving an incorrectly licensed vehicle on the road.
Deciding factor?
However, Section 127 of the Act, which deals with the licensing of public service vehicles, seems to imply that the presence of passengers on the vehicle is a deciding factor in its description. Unfortunately this is still not stated specifically and leaves the question open to interpretation.
Repeated approaches to the Department of the Environment for clarification have not produced a definite ruling. A spokesman for the Department has said that no part of the law could be quoted which would confirm that a psv without passengers changes its classification. Nor could he point to any part of the law which would allow a driver without a psv driving licence to drive a psv.
The only consolation he could offer was that, so far as could be established, there was no record of any successful prosecution in these circumstances.
It was admitted that this was "a grey area" of the law which had never been defined and presumably would depend on future case law.
The spokesman emphasized that the DoE was unable to interpret the law. This is equally true for the staff of CM. Therefore, it only remains to reiterate what has already been said — that there is nothing in the law which specifically allows a psv to be driven without a psv driving licence, leaving the question "When is a psv not a psv?" to be answered by those who are qualified to interpret the law.