Taxi Driver Online

Hey, I hope all the smackheads and drug users never read this but we are sick and tired of them. We decided enough was enough so we thought every single time it happened.... get the police involved, we know that can be time consuming but it has to stop somewhere. What a waste of time, we are now informed by the Police that it is not thier problem, take out a civil case against the tw*ts they say, they are not our debt collectors they say. OK, I can understand the last part BUT now the word is spreading that the the police WILL NOT take action.. ever. It will get to epidemic proportions if the lazy, dole boozing morons manage to string more than 2 words together and tell the other zombies. We are now asking for payment first on over 20% of our journeys, and the public dont like it, most are genuine but how do you know. We flag the addresses and bar it but sometimes even they are cleverer than us and use different mobiles/addresses !!! Apart from dropping them all in the Wear and keeping thier heads down, what can we do? Any ideas?

if your suspicious just get money up front
i know that can cause a bad atmosphere from the off, but its better than being bumped.
as for the police,authorities .........don't get me started

Make an official complaint to the police, you are a tax payer and therefor legally entitled to police protection, which includes people making off without payment, can you imagine ASDA shoplifters getting the same none police response?

Write to the Chief Constable asking if he agrees with his officers that the Theft Act doesn't apply in your manor.

And then hope the the government gets the elected Police Commissioner Act passed as soon as possible. Cos be in no doubt that will help us in the long run.

_________________
IDFIMH

FRAUD ACT 2006 - “doing a runner”:
Making off without payment, or bilking, is now caught by the Fraud Act 2006 Sections 2 and 11 are relevant, however, charges are most easily laid under section 11:
Section 11 “Obtaining services dishonestly” This reads as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for
himself or another—
(a) by a dishonest act, and
(b) in breach of subsection (2).
(2) A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a) they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or
will be made for or in respect of them,
(b) he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in
respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c) when he obtains them, he knows—
(i) that they are being made available on the basis described in
paragraph (a), or
(ii) that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12
months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
5 years or to a fine (or to both).
(4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12months were a reference to 6 months.
CPS guidelines on the above:
The elements of the offence are that the Defendant: obtains for himself or another services

dishonestly knowing the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part.
This offence replaces obtaining services by deception in the Theft Act 1978 which is partly repealed by the Act.
In many cases, the Defendant will also have committed an offence under Section 2 of the Act (Fraud by making a false representation - that payment will be made or made in full). Prosecutors must decide which offence better reflects the criminality involved. The maximum sentence for the Section 11 offence is five years imprisonment.
a) “Obtains for himself or another”:
Section 11 differs from the offences under the Theft Act in that it requires the actual obtaining of a service (by a dishonest act e. g. non payment).
It is not possible to commit the offence by omission of the service alone. This avoids the situation where unscrupulous service providers might feel able to pressure anyone who had been given services they had not requested.
b) “Services”
Services will have the same definition as in Section 1 of the 1978 Theft Act (Archbold 2007, para. 21-3411). The service must be provided on the basis that it will be paid for.
c) “Dishonestly”:
The Ghosh test will apply, see below.
d) “Knowing” :
the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and
e) “Avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part,” see below:
Under the Fraud Act the Defendant must intend to avoid payment for the service provided (in full or in part). He must have that intention at the time he 'avoids'.
The “Gosh” test of dishonesty:
1 This is the standard practitioners work on crime, available at any decent public librar

R v Ghosh, (1982) CA
D a surgeon was filling in as a consultant at a hospital. He pretended that he had himself carried out surgical operations and that money was due to him. The operations had, in fact, been carried out under the NHS by someone else.
Held: In determining whether D was acting dishonestly, the jury had first to decide whether what was done was dishonest. If it was, the jury must then consider whether D himself must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest by the standards of the ordinary reasonable person.
Payment due?:
R v Aziz [1993] Crim LR 708
[Making off without payment - 'the spot' where payment should be made]
D requested a taxi driver to take him to a club 13 miles away. On arrival D refused to pay the £15 fare claiming that the journey was only four miles. The taxi driver at first started to take them back to their hotel, then took them to the police station where he ran out of the taxi.
Held: The Theft Act 1978 did not require payment be made on any particular spot. 'On the spot' related to the knowledge that the customer had as to when payment should be made. In the case of a taxi, payment may be made whilst sitting in the car or standing at the window but the fares were requested when the customer was still in the car. The obligation to pay continued even when being taken back to the starting point / police station. 'On the spot' was not necessarily the final destination of the journey:
Guilty
NOTE The Fraud Act does not repeal s.3 of the Theft Act; it is still available
Actions a driver could take:
Phone the police.
You can take the offender to the police station, but you must be aware that you are making a citizen's arrest.
You need to be clear on the offence you are arresting for and tell the offender you are taking this action.
You have the right to arrest as the offence is an “arrestable offence”.

You can use reasonable force. Broadly that means you can only use force if the offender is resisting, and can only use sufficient force to apprehend. This is complicated and subjective.
If force has to be used you are advised not to do so. You run the risk of injury to yourself and damage to your vehicle. If you injure the passenger you could be charged, you have to account for the force used. As the offence is not a very “serious” one , it is not worth using 'reasonable force' better to let the offender go and report the matter.

This might help... this was put together by a friend of mine and presented to Sefton Council and Merseyside police... and was accepted..... his name is Richard Jarman

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

On a previous occasion when my son had a runner, Mr T posted the above information for me. I took it along to the police station when we reported the insident and at first we got the standard reply that you got. We persevered and kept asking to see a senior officer and we even asked for an appointment to see the chief constable. Eventually the desk chap agreed that it was a criminal mater and he took down the details. He went mad when we told him that the fare was £5.00 but they did go and see the runner and we got the £5.00 back and the runner received a caution.

_________________
Grandad,

That worked for us round here. Now they act within minutes.

_________________
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Believe me, don't get Mercury X2

Easy answer if it gets epidemic is to Cardiff & Swansea em, tenner up front regardless or shut the door and walk.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

I suppose it could be down to attitude.

Our Police, in Ayr, have always been very helpful to me. However when they have several dozen brawling kids on the street, a Taxi Driver with an unpaid £5.00 Fare must seem to be pretty small beer.

_________________
Don't dream it ~ Be it.

All very well, but you get the clever ones who offer a fare less than the indicated amount, arguing the route was prolonged/meter already had money on it before they drove anywhere-or promise to pay the rest later. Constables seem immediately class this as requiring civil action to be taken by the driver. They will only class it as a bilking if the sods run off nowhere to be found...the detective services availed to the Taxi industry is normally zero in seeking to apprehend so may as well not bother with them. Money up front always these days!

If every one insisted on this, the problem would dissapear instantly. The driver may have to start carrying more change though.

_________________
Grandad,

any job out of town on a friday or saturday night then its money up front.
i had a runner for 16.10 one night, i can still remenber him and if he gets in my cab again then he going the opposite way untill i get whats owed.
a couple of weeks ago i had a fair that said she had no money on her just a credit card, paid via phone to our office

daz

I'm not suggesting that a sign in the back of your cab will solve all your problems, drivers always need to be aware.... and trust their instincts....But applying to your local council to have a sign such as the one in the Manchester cab can also be of assistance, especially when the police are called..andthen state its a civil matter... just point them at the sign which is issued by the Council .... it also makes the public aware that it is a criminal offence, I put the link up so it would be easy for someone to make an application and also provide an instance of were another council has implemented it. I was not going to suggest that any body did....... but someone with commonsense might have.

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

Sadly, it all depends on the officer who attends, I was informed that as I am Private Hire it does not apply to us, as we were licenced after 1976 and the original theft act was 1968