UK cities
45+
Direct coverage
TfL PHV licensing
TfL private hire licence and accidents (London PHV)
London-only guide to the licensing fallout after a TfL-licensed private hire collision. The three TfL licences, the 72-hour notification duty, the Marston-run inspection sites, PHV(L)A 1998 sections 7, 8, 13, 16, 17, 25 and 26, the fit-and-proper-person test, Notice of Refusal / Suspension / Revocation, the 21-day Magistrates' Court appeal window, Crown Court onward appeal and judicial review.
- London-only PHV focus
- Independent engineer evidence
- 21-day appeal coordination
- Non-regulated accident support
24/7
UK response
Recovery dispatch and live claim handlers, 365 days a year.
Response
<60m
First contact SLA
Cost
£0
Upfront to driver
A London private hire vehicle collision is two cases running in parallel. The first is the road traffic claim against the at-fault driver's insurer - recovery, repair, like-for-like replacement, loss of earnings. The second is the licensing case in front of Transport for London. TfL is the licensing authority for every PHV driver, every PHV vehicle and every PHV operator inside the Greater London boundary, under the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998. A failed post-accident inspection, an unreported collision or a careless-driving conviction can land a Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation through the letterbox - and the appeal clock under section 25 is 21 days. This page walks the licence regime end to end, names the statutory sections, sets out the Marston-run inspection network that handles post-accident re-inspections, and shows how the Magistrates' Court appeal, the onward Crown Court appeal under section 26 and judicial review under section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 fit together. Coverage is London only - drivers and vehicles plated outside London should read the sibling page on local authority PHV licensing.
The London PHV regime: three TfL licences and three separate accident implications
London PHV work sits inside a single statutory regime - the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 - but TfL Taxi and Private Hire issues three separate licences on the same job. The operator licence under section 3 of the Act permits a company to accept private hire bookings in London. The driver licence under section 13 (the colloquial “PCO licence”) permits an individual to drive a PHV under a booking accepted by a licensed operator. The vehicle licence under section 7 (the “PHV plate”) confirms that a specific car has been inspected and approved as a PHV. All three licences must be in force on the day of the trip; the absence of any one is an offence under the Act and an insurance-coverage problem under section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
For accident purposes the importance of the three-licence structure is that a collision can trigger a separate licensing decision against each licence. The vehicle licence is at risk where the post-accident inspection fails - a structural concern, a broken plate seal, a damaged in-car camera or repair work that does not meet manufacturer specification. The driver licence is at risk where the driver picks up an at-fault RTA conviction (CD10, IN10, DR family) or where a passenger complaint to TfL describes unsafe behaviour. The operator licence is at risk where a pattern of incidents on the same fleet, or a single serious incident with media exposure, triggers an enforcement file at TfL TPH. The three tracks can run simultaneously and a driver may be defending two or three notices at once.
CityGrip's intake process records all three licence numbers on the day-one call because each carries its own appeal route, its own deadline and its own evidential burden. A vehicle-licence appeal is engineering-led; a driver-licence appeal is fitness-led; an operator-licence file is usually defended by the operator's own in-house legal team but the driver's evidence on the underlying incident still feeds into it. None of the three appeals is the road traffic claim, and none of the three substitutes for the at-fault insurer's investigation. They run in parallel and they have to be project-managed in parallel.
What counts as a “reportable accident” under TfL PHV Notices
TfL's published licence conditions and the PHV Driver Handbook treat as reportable any collision involving a TfL-licensed PHV which materially affects the safety, performance, appearance or comfort of the vehicle. That formula does heavy lifting in practice. “Safety” captures any collision that bends a structural panel, deploys an airbag, damages a seat belt anchorage or compromises the underbody. “Performance” captures any collision that affects steering, suspension, braking or driveline. “Appearance” captures any visible damage that could mislead a passenger or the public about the vehicle's status - including a scrape that obscures the TfL plate or the operator livery. “Comfort” captures interior damage, broken air conditioning, a damaged child-restraint anchorage or a wet/contaminated interior.
The drafting is deliberately broad. TfL's compliance team's working position is that the licensee should report and let the compliance officer decide whether to stand a re-inspection down, rather than the licensee deciding on the day. The second category captured by the licence conditions is any incident causing injury - to the driver, a passenger, another road user or a pedestrian - regardless of whether the vehicle was operating under a booking at the time. The third category is anything affecting the driver's or operator's fitness to drive or operate - for example, a roadside breath test, a section 170 RTA 1988 failure-to-stop allegation, or any incident that produces a police caution or charge sheet.
A separate notification duty was introduced in July 2024 by TPH Notice 05/24: every TfL-licensed taxi driver, PHV driver and operator must inform TfL within 48 hours of any arrest, charge, caution or conviction. That duty sits on top of the 72-hour collision-notification duty and runs from the moment the licensee becomes aware of the arrest, charge, caution or conviction. The two duties can apply to the same incident - a serious collision with a police investigation will engage both - and the safer course is to file both notifications even if the same underlying facts are recorded twice.
TFL
03
Section 3 of the walkthrough.
The 72-hour driver and owner notification duty
The 72-hour rule is the headline collision-notification duty for a TfL-licensed PHV. It applies primarily to the owner of the vehicle - the licensee who holds the section 7 vehicle licence - and through the operator's contractual chain it applies in practice to the driver as well. The rule is published in the PHV Driver Handbook and is treated by TfL as a licence-condition obligation; breach is a ground on which TfL can take action under section 8 of the PHV(L)A 1998 against the vehicle licence and (where the driver was on the booking) under section 16 against the driver licence.
The 72-hour clock runs from the date and time of the collision itself, not from the date the licensee appreciated the damage was material. That reading is consistent with TfL's enforcement practice and with the strict-liability nature of most TfL licence conditions. Where a structural concern is only discovered after the bodyshop has stripped the vehicle, the prudent course is to notify TfL immediately on discovery and explain the delay in writing. Late notification is a breach in its own right but mitigation is normally taken into account at the compliance-decision stage.
Notifications go through the TfL TPH email channel - the current address is published on the TfL Taxi and Private Hire help pages - and should attach the following evidence pack: a one-page factual narrative of the collision, scene photographs taken before vehicles were moved, the dashcam clip extracted before the device's rolling buffer overwrote it, the other driver's name, address, vehicle registration and insurer details collected under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the police incident reference number where police attended, the driver's certificate of motor insurance and the operator's incident reference number. Keep a dated copy of the notification email - it is the document that proves you met the 72-hour deadline.
Post-accident inspection: the TfL TPH Marston / NSL network
The TfL Taxi and Private Hire vehicle inspection network was reorganised in 2023 and is now operated on TfL's behalf by Marston Holdings (formally NSL). The currently published sites are Staples Corner (Aquarius House, Priestley Way, NW2 7AN), Enfield (Watermill Centre, Edison Road, EN3 7XF), Crayford (Acorn Industrial Park, Kent, DA1 4AL), Coulsdon (Redlands, Ullswater Crescent, CR5 2HT) and Heston (Airlinks Industrial Estate, Spitfire Way, TW5 9NR), with a Canning Town option appearing in some published lists. The legacy Park Royal / Beddington Cross site naming used in older driver guidance has been superseded - the current Marston-run network is the one that matters for a post-accident re-inspection in 2026.
The post-accident inspection covers the same matrix as the standard six- or twelve-month TfL inspection plus the accident-specific items the inspector calls out. Structural integrity is checked at every visible repair line; the manufacturer's structural-repair documentation is reviewed for replaced-part part numbers, weld certifications and a method statement. The TfL plate seal is checked - a broken seal is a flag even if the plate itself is undamaged. The in-car camera is checked for power, recording, alignment and footage retention. MOT validity is checked against the DVLA database. Tyres, brakes, suspension and steering are checked against the standard TfL vehicle licensing inspection manual. Body alignment is checked against the manufacturer's measurement points where the inspector calls for it.
Where the inspection fails, the inspector issues a fail sheet specifying the items that must be put right and the licensing decision the file is being escalated to. In a straightforward case the vehicle is repaired or re-repaired, re-presented and passed without a Notice of Refusal ever issuing. In a contested case - typically where the inspector takes the view that the repair is unsafe and the bodyshop disagrees, or where a structural concern was missed in the original repair - a Notice of Refusal or Suspension issues and the 21-day appeal clock starts. The independent engineer's report is then the spine of any subsequent appeal.
PHV(L)A 1998 sections 7, 8, 13, 16 and 17 - the statutory triggers
Section 7 is the vehicle-licence grant power. TfL may grant a London PHV vehicle licence only where the vehicle is suitable for use as a PHV; the section authorises TfL to attach prescribed conditions and such other conditions as the licensing authority sees fit. Suitability is assessed against the published TfL vehicle licensing inspection manual and the age, emissions and accessibility standards in force at the time. Post-accident, section 7 is engaged on the next renewal application - if the vehicle is no longer suitable, TfL can refuse to renew.
Section 8 is the in-life suspension and revocation power for vehicle licences. A suspension under section 8(2)(b) takes effect on service of the notice. The suspension continues until a constable or authorised officer directs that the licence is again in force. If the licence remains suspended at the end of a two-month period, the authority may by further notice direct that the licence is revoked, and revocation takes effect 21 days after that further notice is served. The owner has a right of appeal to the Magistrates' Court under section 25, with the same 21-day clock running from service of the relevant notice.
Section 13 is the driver-licence grant power. TfL may grant a London PHV driver licence to an applicant who satisfies the fit-and-proper-person test, the medical standards, the topographical and English-language standards, and who holds the requisite DBS clearance. Section 13(2A) added the Certificate-of-Good-Conduct overseas-residence requirement from July 2024 under TPH Notice 05/24 for applicants and renewers who have spent three or more months outside the United Kingdom in the previous ten years.
Section 16 is the driver-disciplinary power. TfL may at any time suspend or revoke a London PHV driver's licence where the licensee is no longer fit and proper, has been convicted of an offence which makes them unsuitable, or has otherwise failed to meet the licence conditions. Section 16 decisions are the ones most often triggered by an at-fault RTA conviction or a passenger complaint following a collision.
Section 17 is the procedure on a section 16 decision. The default rule is that a suspension or revocation takes effect at the end of 21 days beginning with the day the notice is served - giving the driver a window in which to lodge the appeal before the notice bites. Section 17(3) is the exception: where TfL is of the opinion that the interests of public safety require the suspension/revocation to take immediate effect, and the notice includes a statement of that opinion and the reasons for it, the notice takes effect on service. The appeal right is preserved but the driver is off the road from day one. In a serious-incident file an immediate-effect notice is the realistic expectation.
The fit-and-proper-person test - post-accident application
The fit-and-proper-person test is the substantive standard TfL applies to every grant and renewal of a PHV driver or operator licence under sections 3, 13 and 16 of the PHV(L)A 1998. The test is not defined in the Act itself - it is shaped by TfL's published Taxi and Private Hire Policy (most recently re-published in July 2023) and by the Department for Transport's Statutory Standards for taxi and PHV licensing. In practice the test is a balance-sheet exercise: TfL gathers DBS results, DVLA driver record extracts, complaint history, medical reports, the English-language assessment outcome, the topographical skills test result and any criminal-court or licensing-court history, and then applies the published policy to decide whether the licensee passes.
Post-accident the fit-and-proper test is most often engaged through the DVLA record. A CD10 conviction (driving without due care and attention) typically carries three to nine points and is treated by TfL's policy as a moderate red flag - single CD10s on an otherwise clean record can usually be defended; repeat CD10s or a CD10 within an existing licence-warning regime are harder. An IN10 conviction (using a vehicle uninsured) is treated as a serious red flag because hire-and-reward insurance is a regulatory prerequisite of the licence; TfL's policy permits refusal on a single IN10 within the rehabilitation period under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. A DR family conviction (drink-driving) is treated as a hard red flag and a renewal application is unlikely to succeed within the standard policy windows.
The appeal route remains the same - section 25 to the Magistrates' Court, with the court conducting a rehearing on the merits. The court is not bound by TfL's policy windows; the policy is a relevant consideration but the court applies the statutory test for itself. That distinction matters in the appeal strategy: a case that fails the policy on a points-and-windows basis can still succeed on the statutory test if the underlying facts are presented in the round, with character evidence, mitigating circumstances and an articulated case on public protection.
Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation - anatomy of the document
The Notice is the trigger document for everything that follows. Its statutory contents are prescribed: it must state the decision (refusal, suspension or revocation), the section of the PHV(L)A 1998 under which the decision is made, the grounds for the decision, the date on which the decision takes effect (either 21 days from service or immediately under section 17(3)), and the right of appeal to the Magistrates' Court within 21 days of service under section 25(5). A notice that omits any of the statutory contents is potentially defective and that defect is a ground of appeal in its own right.
Service is normally by recorded delivery to the licensee's address recorded with TfL or by email to the licensee's registered email address. Section 25(2) makes clear that the appeal clock runs from the date of service, not the date the licensee read the notice - which is why TfL keeps proof-of-service records and why an absent or out-of-date address on the licensee's TfL account is a serious administrative risk. Update the address on the TfL portal as soon as it changes; a notice served to an old address can run the 21-day clock to expiry before the licensee knows the file exists.
The grounds section is the part that most repays close reading. It tells the licensee which evidence TfL relied on, which witnesses were heard, which documents were referenced, and which policy paragraphs the decision was framed under. Each ground is a potential appeal point. The licensee's first response is therefore to read the notice with a highlighter, list the grounds, list the evidence TfL appears to have relied on, and request the underlying material under the duty of fairness and (as a backstop) a subject access request under the UK GDPR. The disclosure response shapes the appeal bundle.
06TFLKey takeaway
Appeals to the Magistrates' Court under PHV(L)A 1998 sections 25 and 26
Section 25 is the principal appeal route. It provides that any appeal which lies under the Act to a magistrates' court against a TfL decision in relation to a licence shall be by way of complaint for an order, that the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 applies to the proceedings, and that the time within which the appeal must be brought is 21 days from the date on which notice of the decision is served on the licensee. The notice itself must state the right of appeal and the time within which it may be brought; absent or defective wording on the notice is a procedural challenge in its own right.
The standard of review is a rehearing on the merits. The Magistrates' Court does not sit in a Wednesbury-reasonableness role over TfL - it conducts a fresh examination of the licensing question on the evidence put before it. TfL is the respondent and bears the evidential burden of supporting its decision. The appellant calls witnesses and tenders documents. The court can receive expert evidence - an independent engineer's report in a vehicle-licence appeal, a consultant psychiatrist's report in a medical-fitness appeal, character witnesses in a fit-and-proper appeal. Cross-examination is permitted. The District Judge gives an oral decision the same day or reserves judgment for a short period.
Practical preparation is bundle-driven. The hearing bundle should be paginated, indexed and chronologically arranged: the notice; the inspection sheet or fitness file; the independent engineer's report; the bodyshop's repair pack including photographs and replaced-part part numbers; the driver's training and licensing history; witness statements from the driver, the bodyshop manager and (where relevant) the operator's compliance officer; character witnesses where fitness is in issue; the appellant's skeleton argument with paragraph cross-references to the bundle; and a draft order. Counsel or solicitors will normally agree the bundle with TfL's legal team in advance of the hearing.
Section 26 provides for an onward appeal from the Magistrates' Court to the Crown Court in defined cases - particularly where the original Magistrates' Court decision is on a question of fact or mixed fact and law. The Crown Court hearing is itself a rehearing. The 21-day appeal clock to the Crown Court runs from the Magistrates' Court decision. Onward Crown Court appeals are rare in PHV licensing because most appellate work resolves at the Magistrates' Court stage, but the route is preserved by statute and should be considered where the Magistrates' Court decision turns on a point that warrants further review.
Crown Court onward appeal - appellate jurisdiction in PHV licensing
The Crown Court's appellate jurisdiction over PHV licensing decisions sits inside its general appellate jurisdiction from the Magistrates' Court under section 108 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and the targeted appeal route under section 26 of the PHV(L)A 1998. In practice the route is used where the Magistrates' Court decision turns on contested fact-finding, where new evidence has emerged that could not have been adduced below, or where the appellant takes the view that the Magistrates' Court did not give proper weight to a particular line of evidence. Pure points of law tend to go to the Administrative Court on case stated rather than to the Crown Court.
The Crown Court hearing is again a rehearing. It is conducted before a Circuit Judge sitting with two lay justices. TfL is represented; the appellant calls fresh evidence as well as repeating the evidence below. The court has the same powers as the Magistrates' Court - to confirm, vary or substitute the original licensing decision. Costs follow the event in principle. The Crown Court's decision is final on the licensing question subject only to a judicial review challenge or a case-stated application on a point of law.
In CityGrip's experience Crown Court onward appeals are reserved for the small number of cases where the Magistrates' Court decision is plainly wrong on the facts or where significant new evidence has come to light after the Magistrates' Court hearing - for example, a subsequent engineering inspection that contradicts TfL's original report, or a witness who could not be located at the Magistrates' Court stage. The cost and timeline of a Crown Court onward appeal are higher than the Magistrates' Court appeal; the decision to escalate is taken with counsel after a written advice on the merits.
Judicial review as a last resort under section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981
Judicial review is the public-law remedy for unlawful, unreasonable or procedurally unfair decisions by public authorities. The statutory foundation is section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 and the procedure is set out in Civil Procedure Rules Part 54. The application is made to the Administrative Court within the King's Bench Division of the High Court. The time limit is the latest of three months from the decision under challenge or as soon as reasonably practicable - and the court has a strong preference for promptness. Permission to bring the claim is a separate stage and is granted only on arguable grounds.
The pre-action protocol for judicial review requires a letter before claim with a fourteen-day response window. The letter sets out the decision under challenge, the grounds of challenge, the remedy sought and the relevant facts. The authority's response either concedes the point, offers an alternative remedy or defends the decision. If the response does not resolve the dispute the claim form is issued, served and goes to the permission stage. Common grounds of challenge in PHV licensing are procedural unfairness (no proper opportunity to respond, undisclosed evidence relied on), Wednesbury unreasonableness, illegality (the decision was outside the authority's powers), failure to consider relevant matters or considering irrelevant matters, breach of the public-sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, and breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights where the licensing decision determines a civil right.
In PHV licensing the alternative remedy of a section 25 PHV(L)A 1998 statutory appeal will normally bar judicial review - the courts expect the statutory route to be exhausted first. Judicial review is therefore reserved for decisions that fall outside the statutory appeal route. Examples include a TfL refusal to grant an extension of time to appeal, a published policy that is challenged as unlawful on its face, a decision to revoke without a procedural step the licensee was entitled to, and a refusal to disclose material the licensee needed in order to run an appeal. In those narrow categories the Administrative Court is the right forum and the section 31 SCA 1981 jurisdiction is engaged.
Six-step process for handling a TfL Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation
Step 1
Read the notice and diary the 21-day appeal deadline
On the day the Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation is served, read it through twice. Identify the section of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 cited as the basis for the decision - typically section 8 for vehicles, section 16 or 17 for drivers. Note the date of service and add 21 days: the appeal deadline under section 25(5) is calendar days, not working days, and it does not extend for weekends or bank holidays. Photograph the notice and store the original in a labelled file. The clock has started.
Step 2
Request the underlying inspection sheet and decision file
Email the TfL TPH compliance team requesting the inspection sheet, the inspector's notes and any internal decision memorandum that supports the notice. Where the decision is fitness-based, request a copy of the licensee file referenced in the notice. TfL is bound by the duty of fairness to disclose the material on which it relied. A subject access request under the UK GDPR is the formal backstop where informal disclosure is incomplete - the response window there is one month.
Step 3
Instruct an independent engineer or licensing expert
For a vehicle-based notice instruct an independent engineer to inspect the vehicle, review the bodyshop's repair documentation, photograph the work and produce a written report addressed to the court. For a driver-based notice instruct a PHV licensing solicitor or counsel to review the fitness file. The independent expert evidence is the spine of the appeal: in a rehearing on the merits the court substitutes its own judgment for TfL's, and the strongest expert evidence wins.
Step 4
Lodge the appeal by complaint at the Magistrates' Court
The appeal is by way of complaint for an order under the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. The complaint is laid at the Magistrates' Court for the area in which the licensing decision was taken - for TfL decisions, the Westminster Magistrates' Court is the default forum. Pay the court fee and serve the complaint on TfL within the same 21-day window. The court issues a summons listing the matter for case-management directions, typically four to eight weeks ahead.
Step 5
Prepare the appeal bundle and witness evidence
The hearing bundle is paginated, indexed and exchanged with TfL ahead of the hearing date directed by the court. Standard contents are the notice, the inspection sheet, the engineer's report, the bodyshop's repair documentation, the driver's training and conviction history where fitness is in issue, witness statements from the driver, the bodyshop manager and any character witnesses, and a skeleton argument cross-referencing the bundle. Where structural repair is the issue, photographs and replaced-part part numbers are critical.
Step 6
Attend the hearing and (if needed) consider Crown Court onward appeal
The hearing is conducted as a rehearing on the merits before a District Judge. TfL is represented by its legal team and calls the inspector or the case officer; the appellant calls the engineer and any factual witnesses. The judge gives an oral or written decision the same day or within a short reserved period. Onward appeal from the Magistrates' Court lies to the Crown Court under section 26 of the PHV(L)A 1998 in defined cases. Judicial review under section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 is the final route where no statutory appeal route reaches the point in issue.
Related pages in the minicab and PHV vertical
This page is part of the wider UK minicab and PHV vertical. Work up to the hub page for the overall accident-claim framework, or work laterally to the platform-specific pages and the hire-and-reward insurance file.
TfL PHV licence and accidents - frequently asked questions
- When must I tell TfL about an accident?
- If you own a TfL-licensed private hire vehicle you must notify Transport for London within 72 hours of any collision that materially affects the safety, performance, appearance or comfort of the vehicle. The duty is set out in the PHV Driver Handbook published by TfL and is enforceable as a licence condition under the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998. The notification is in addition to your operator's own incident-report duty and is separate from your hire-and-reward insurer notification. Report the collision through the TfL TPH email channel and follow up with a written summary, scene photographs, the dashcam clip, the other driver's section 170 details and the police reference where police attended.
- Can TfL refuse my PHV plate after a non-fault accident?
- Yes - fault is not the test. TfL's power under section 7 of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 is to grant a vehicle licence where the vehicle is suitable for use as a PHV, and under section 8 to suspend or revoke that licence where the vehicle is no longer fit. A non-fault collision can still leave a vehicle structurally compromised, with a damaged in-car camera, a broken plate seal or repair work that does not meet manufacturer specification. A failed post-accident inspection at a TfL-appointed Marston / NSL site can therefore trigger a Notice of Refusal or Suspension regardless of who caused the collision. The remedy is a documented manufacturer-specification repair, a fresh inspection and (if the decision still stands) an appeal to the Magistrates' Court under section 25.
- How do I appeal a Notice of Refusal?
- An appeal against a TfL Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation lies to the Magistrates' Court under section 25 of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998. The appeal must be brought within 21 days of the date on which the notice is served on you. The procedure is by way of complaint for an order and the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 applies. The court conducts a fresh rehearing on the merits - it is not limited to reviewing TfL's reasoning. The evidence pack should include the independent engineer's report, the bodyshop's repair documentation, the original inspection sheet, any structural certifications, your driver and operator history, and witness statements where fitness is in issue. Onward appeals lie to the Crown Court under section 26 in defined cases, and judicial review is available as a last resort where the statutory appeal route does not reach the decision complained of.
- What is a 'reportable accident' for a TfL-licensed PHV?
- TfL treats as reportable any collision involving a TfL-licensed PHV which materially affects the safety, performance, appearance or comfort of the vehicle - wording drawn from the PHV Driver Handbook. In practice this captures any collision that bends a panel, breaks a light, damages the underbody, deploys an airbag, requires the vehicle to be recovered from the scene, results in injury to driver or passenger, or affects the in-car camera, the TfL plate seal or the meter / fare-display equipment. A minor parking scuff that does not affect any of those things is not generally reportable, but the safer course is to report and let TfL's compliance officers decide.
- Where are the TfL post-accident inspection sites?
- Following a 2023 reorganisation the TfL Taxi and Private Hire vehicle inspection network is operated on TfL's behalf by Marston Holdings (formally NSL). The current published sites are Staples Corner (Aquarius House, Priestley Way, NW2 7AN), Enfield (Watermill Centre, Edison Road, EN3 7XF), Crayford (Acorn Industrial Park, DA1 4AL), Coulsdon (Redlands, Ullswater Crescent, CR5 2HT) and Heston (Airlinks Industrial Estate, Spitfire Way, TW5 9NR). A Canning Town option has appeared in some published lists. Re-inspections after a collision can be booked through the NSL call centre or the TfL TPH portal - the relevant site depends on geography and on the inspection type required.
- Does the 72-hour clock start from the collision or from the time I knew about it?
- The published TfL position is that the 72-hour clock runs from the date and time of the collision itself, not from the date the driver appreciated that the damage was material. That reading is consistent with the strict-liability nature of most licence conditions and with TfL's enforcement practice. Where a defect is discovered late - for example, a structural concern that only emerges when the vehicle is inspected by the bodyshop - the prudent course is to notify TfL immediately on discovery and explain the delay in writing. Late notification is a licence-condition breach in its own right, but mitigation is generally taken into account at the compliance-decision stage.
- Will an at-fault RTA conviction such as CD10 or IN10 affect my driver licence?
- It can. The fit-and-proper-person test in the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 sections 13 and 16 requires TfL to be satisfied that the applicant or licensee is fit and proper to hold a PHV driver licence. A conviction for careless driving (CD10), driving without due care and attention (CD10) or using a vehicle uninsured (IN10) is recorded on the DVLA driver record and is disclosed at the next licence renewal. TfL's published taxi and private hire policy treats motoring convictions as relevant material in the fit-and-proper assessment - the more recent and the more serious the conviction, the heavier the weight. An IN10 in particular is treated seriously because hire-and-reward insurance is a regulatory prerequisite of the licence.
- What is the difference between Notice of Refusal, Notice of Suspension and Notice of Revocation?
- A Notice of Refusal is served where TfL declines to grant a licence - for example, on a renewal application where the vehicle fails inspection or where a fitness concern has not been resolved. A Notice of Suspension is served where TfL takes an existing licence out of force temporarily, typically pending re-inspection or pending the outcome of a fitness investigation. A Notice of Revocation is served where TfL terminates an existing licence permanently. All three are statutory decisions under PHV(L)A 1998 - vehicle decisions under sections 7 and 8, driver decisions under sections 13, 16 and 17 - and all three carry the same 21-day Magistrates' Court appeal route under section 25.
- Can a Notice of Suspension take immediate effect?
- Yes. Section 17(3) of the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 permits TfL to direct that a suspension or revocation takes immediate effect on service of the notice, where TfL is of the opinion that the interests of public safety require it. The notice must include a statement of that opinion and the reasons for it. The right of appeal is preserved and the same 21-day clock applies, but the licensee is off the road from the moment the notice is served - which can be the same day the post-accident inspection fails. For a self-employed driver that loss of earnings can be severe; opening the appeal file immediately is therefore essential.
- Do I need a solicitor for the Magistrates' Court appeal?
- You are entitled to represent yourself, to instruct a solicitor or to instruct counsel directly through the Bar's public access scheme. PHV licensing appeals are heard by a District Judge in the Magistrates' Court and the procedure is by complaint for an order under the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. The court conducts a rehearing on the merits, which means the evidence has to be presented fresh - bundle preparation, witness statements, expert engineer evidence and structured cross-examination all matter. For most contested cases an experienced PHV licensing solicitor is worth the cost; for inspection-only refusals where the engineering evidence is uncontested, self-representation with a paginated bundle can work.
- Can I challenge a TfL decision by judicial review?
- Judicial review is available under section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, but only where the statutory appeal route to the Magistrates' Court does not reach the decision complained of, or where the alternative remedy is inadequate. The pre-action protocol for judicial review requires a letter before claim with a fourteen-day response window. Permission to bring the claim is a separate stage and is granted only on arguable grounds. In practice the section 25 PHV(L)A appeal route covers almost every adverse licensing decision a driver or vehicle owner will face, and judicial review is reserved for procedural challenges - for example, a refusal to grant an extension of time, a decision to revoke without an inspection or a published policy that is alleged to be unlawful on its face.
- Does losing my PHV plate affect my hire-and-reward insurance?
- Yes, and the effect is structural. A hire-and-reward policy is rated on the assumption that the driver holds a current PHV driver licence and the vehicle holds a current PHV plate. Where the plate is revoked or suspended the vehicle is no longer being used for hire and reward and the policy ceases to be the right cover - and where the driver licence is revoked, the policy will usually be cancelled by the insurer mid-term on the next renewal review. Notify your hire-and-reward insurer in writing within the policy's notification window when any TfL notice is served, even where you intend to appeal. Failure to notify can prejudice cover on the appeal-period vehicle use and on any subsequent renewal.
- How long does a Magistrates' Court appeal take and what does it cost?
- Typical timelines run from three to nine months from the service of the notice to the appeal hearing date, depending on the listing pressure at the Magistrates' Court that takes the case. The fixed court fee for an appeal by complaint is set by the HM Courts and Tribunals Service fee schedule and is modest. The substantive cost is in expert evidence and representation: an independent engineer's report for a structural-defect appeal typically runs to a four-figure sum, and counsel or solicitor fees vary with the complexity of the case. Costs follow the event in principle - a successful appellant can apply for a costs order against TfL - but in practice cost recovery in licensing appeals is partial.
Talk to a real person
Open a TfL PHV file or appeal-support fileUK accident support, end-to-end.
London-only support for TfL-licensed PHV drivers and vehicle owners after a collision or a Notice of Refusal, Suspension or Revocation. Independent engineer evidence, bodyshop documentation review and Magistrates' Court appeal coordination under PHV(L)A 1998 section 25. CityGrip Accident Claims (Citygrip LTD).
Calls may be recorded for quality and compliance. We do not provide legal advice. Personal injury enquiries are referred only with your consent to authorised partners.
Visit our team
London office
124 City Road
London, EC1V 2NX
Coverage
- Phone & accident form24 / 7
- Recovery dispatch24 / 7
- Repair coordinationMon-Sat 8:00 - 18:00
- SundaysEmergency only
45+UK cities
9vehicle types
GDPRcompliant
Tip: submit the accident form first - our team will call back with a reference and next steps.