Why has the cross-border taxi licensing row DEEPENED after Wolverhampton private hire driver conviction figures emerge?
- Perry Richardson
- May 2
- 5 min read
Updated: May 4
Fresh figures showing a large number of taxi and private hire licences were granted by City of Wolverhampton Council to applicants with criminal convictions has intensified anger among drivers and local authorities already campaigning against cross-border hiring practices across England.
Data obtained through a Freedom of Information request revealed the council granted licences last year to 438 people with criminal convictions. Among those were 158 people convicted of violent offences, 61 convicted of drug offences, 36 convicted of drink-related offences and four convicted of sexual offences.
For many taxi and private hire drivers opposed to cross-border hiring, the latest figures are likely to reinforce concerns that some licensing authorities are becoming national “licence factories”, where drivers rejected elsewhere may seek approval through councils perceived to have lower barriers or faster processing times.
The issue has become particularly contentious in cities such as Newcastle, Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool and Bristol, where locally licensed drivers often compete with vehicles licensed hundreds of miles away.
More than 150 drivers with violent convictions granted licences as pressure builds on Government to tighten cross-border hiring rules
Drivers and trade groups argue this weakens local accountability, undermines enforcement and creates inconsistent safeguarding standards.
The revelations surrounding Wolverhampton are also likely to fuel frustration among Hackney carriage taxi drivers, who are subject to tighter local operating rules and geographical restrictions than private hire drivers. Many black cab representatives have argued for years that private hire cross-border rules create an uneven regulatory playing field.
While the figures may alarm passengers and drivers alike, licensing authorities are permitted under current law to grant licences to applicants with previous convictions provided they satisfy “fit and proper person” tests and meet local policy requirements. A conviction does not automatically disqualify an applicant.
City of Wolverhampton Council defended its processes following publication of the data, stressing that safeguarding remained its highest priority.
Tim Johnson, chief executive of the council, said: “There is nothing more important to us than the safety of passengers in cars licensed by this council.
“That’s why safeguarding is such a priority for us. This is shown by the many unique and innovative measures we employ to keep people safe, including being the only council to carry out daily DBS checks on all drivers.”
Johnson added that the authority refused thousands of applications annually and assessed every case individually using Department for Transport guidance and the council’s own convictions policy.
The council also highlighted that it shares conviction data relating to licensed drivers with other authorities, arguing that national transparency between councils remains inconsistent.
However, critics of the current licensing framework argue that the issue extends beyond safeguarding checks alone. Many point instead to what they see as structural weaknesses within England’s fragmented taxi and private hire licensing regime.
Under existing legislation, a driver licensed by one council can legally undertake pre-booked private hire work almost anywhere in England and Wales. This became increasingly controversial following the rise of app-based booking platforms, which enabled operators and drivers to work seamlessly across multiple authority boundaries.
The legal framework underpinning the system dates largely from legislation introduced decades before smartphone booking apps transformed the sector. Industry representatives argue the law has failed to keep pace with modern operating models.
Pressure for reform has intensified over the past several years. A growing number of councils have complained they are unable to effectively enforce standards against drivers licensed elsewhere because disciplinary powers sit primarily with the issuing authority.
Several local authorities and trade bodies have called for either national licensing standards or restrictions limiting the scale of out-of-area working.
The Government has already acknowledged concerns surrounding cross-border hiring and launched several initiatives aimed at reforming the sector.
The previous Conservative administration commissioned the Task and Finish Group on Taxi and Private Hire Vehicle Licensing, chaired by Professor Mohammed Abdel-Haq. Its report recommended significant changes to improve safeguarding, data sharing and national consistency.
One of the key recommendations was the creation of national minimum standards for taxi and private hire licensing. The report also supported stronger enforcement powers and improved information sharing between councils.
In response, the Department for Transport introduced statutory taxi and private hire vehicle standards in England in 2020. These included recommendations around criminal background checks, safeguarding training, complaint handling and suitability assessments.
However, the standards stopped short of fundamentally changing cross-border hiring rules.
More recently, the Government confirmed it intends to overhaul elements of the licensing regime through wider transport reforms. Ministers have repeatedly acknowledged industry concerns that current legislation no longer reflects how the private hire market operates.
The issue has also been examined by parliamentarians through various inquiries and debates. MPs from multiple parties have raised concerns about inconsistent licensing standards and enforcement challenges linked to out-of-area vehicles.
The Commons Transport Committee has previously explored taxi and private hire regulation, including the impact of ride-hailing platforms and passenger safety concerns. Evidence submitted during those discussions repeatedly highlighted tensions surrounding Wolverhampton’s licensing model and cross-border operations more broadly.
Local government organisations have also pushed for reform. The Local Government Association has called for powers allowing councils to better control drivers operating extensively within their areas but licensed elsewhere.
The Government has already taken partial steps toward this through the National Register of Taxi and Private Hire Licence Revocations and Refusals, known as NR3. The database allows councils to check whether applicants have previously had licences refused or revoked elsewhere.
Participation in the system has become mandatory, but critics argue it still does not address broader concerns about differing standards between authorities.
Another live issue under discussion is whether private hire drivers should be more closely tied to the areas where they are licensed. Some within the industry support limits on the percentage of work undertaken outside a home licensing district, although operators and app firms have warned such restrictions could reduce flexibility and passenger availability.
Ride-hailing firms have consistently argued that national platforms depend on cross-border operational flexibility to meet customer demand efficiently.
For drivers opposed to the current system, though, the latest Wolverhampton figures are likely to harden views that reform cannot come soon enough.
There is a growing number within the trade that believe public confidence risks being damaged if passengers perceive that drivers refused in one area can simply obtain a licence elsewhere and continue working nationally.
The debate now places further pressure on ministers to clarify how far forthcoming reforms will go. While the Government has pledged to modernise taxi and private hire licensing, many of the sector’s most controversial questions remain unresolved.
Until legislative changes are introduced, councils such as City of Wolverhampton Council will continue operating within the current legal framework, one that increasingly sits at the centre of a national argument over safety, standards and the future structure of England’s private hire industry.
