Taxi Driver Online

Taxi driver loses licence over illegal tobacco

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqx8q4e7lr9o

A taxi driver has been stripped of his licence after being linked to illegal tobacco and vape sales.

Redcar and Cleveland Council said trading standards officials had provided information about the driver previously being involved in selling the products from retail premises.

A spokesperson said the authority did not have any evidence this happened when they were a licensed driver.

Taxi drivers can lose their licence if they have a criminal conviction but can also have it removed if the council does not consider them suitable to hold one.

The authority said the driver had a private hire licence for the borough for four months before it was revoked.

"We do not have any evidence to suggest that any sale took place while the person was a licensed driver," a spokesperson said.

'Appeared disingenuous'

In 2022, the council implemented a new policy requiring taxi drivers to submit to criminal record checks by the Disclosure and Barring Service every six months, down from three years.

But, even if a taxi driver does not have a criminal record, the council can deem them not to be a fit and proper person to hold a licence, the Local Democracy Reporting Service said.

In June, Stockton Council revoked the licence of a hackney carriage and private hire driver after allegations of sexual harassment and grooming emerged.

Police took no further action but the authority's licensing committee - working to a lower standard of proof - said he "appeared disingenuous" under questioning by council officers.

Decisions to revoke a licence can be appealed against in the magistrates courts.

Taxi drivers with a revoked licence cannot apply elsewhere as their details are added to a national register.

_________________
IDFIMH

So was his license granted before someone looked at the DBS?

_________________
IDFIMH

Sussex, the way it reads it looks like the information licensing received from trading standards was never on the DBS, and was certainly never recorded as a criminal offence.

Which, as I say below, makes it a very good example for sceptics of quasi-judicial proceedings

Might as well post this below - did the legwork earlier on, and saved it in my drafts, but was distracted by other stuff...

But, for what it's worth, although the piece is by the same LDRS journalist, there are some differences in the text - maybe some BBC sub-editor been making a few changes

No point going through them all, but the other bit I latched onto is worded slightly differently, as can be seen below...

Quasi-judicial time

Thought this was quite a good explanation of how it all works with regard to the standard of proof required (although it doesn't use the formal language in that regard), and how the quasi-judicial licensing process works compared to the criminal courts (while, of course, that's the principle, but you could disagree with the outcome here on the particular facts, but there's not much in the way of detail and explanation).

However, spot the wee clanger at the end...think we've been here before, actually...


Taxi driver stripped of licence over previous involvement in supply of illegal baccy and vapes

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/tees ... r-30633816

The driver previously spent four months driving private hire vehicles after being licensed in Redcar and Cleveland

A taxi driver has been stripped of his licence to operate by a local authority after being linked to illegal tobacco sales.

Redcar and Cleveland Council said it received information from trading standards officials about the driver previously being involved in the sale or supply of illicit tobacco and vaping products from retail premises.

A spokeswoman said that the person concerned had been licensed to drive private hire vehicles in the borough for four months before his licence was revoked. She added: “We do not have any evidence to suggest that any sale took place while the person was a licensed driver.”

It’s unclear whether the driver received a criminal conviction for the illegal sales, but licensed drivers must within seven days disclose to the council in writing the details of any conviction or caution imposed on them by a court.

In 2022 the council implemented a new policy meaning taxi drivers also have to submit to criminal record checks every six months by the Disclosure and Barring Service, rather than the previous three year period, in line with statutory guidelines issued by the Government.

Even if a taxi driver does not have a criminal record, they can still be deemed not to be a fit and proper person to drive under the auspices of a local authority.

In June Stockton Council revoked the licence of a hackney carriage and private hire driver after allegations of sexual harassment and grooming, even though no formal action by police resulted. A licensing panel said it was “not satisfied that they would allow people for whom they care to enter a vehicle with [the driver] due to their doubts surrounding his explanation of the circumstances that led to him being investigated by the police.

“The committee felt that this was compounded by [his] concerning history as a licensed driver.”

Decisions to revoke a licence can be appealed to the local magistrates court. Taxi drivers cannot apply for a licence elsewhere when they are revoked by a licensing authority as their details are added to a national register of taxi licence refusals and revocations.

As per previously, the register is for information purposes only, and nothing to stop a revoked/refused/suspended driver applying elsewhere

(And you can see the slight difference in the wording - the BBC have left quite a few words out and rearranged things slightly. Another one I noticed is that the BBC uses the phrase 'standard of proof' while the other source doesn't. Which is interesting because while I thought the Gazette version was quite a good explanation of it all, it seemed to actively avoid using more technical phrases like 'standard of proof' )

Rereading the piece, it looks like he was never convicted of an offence, only linked to one.

I suppose the same could be said of millions of drivers who never get caught speeding but exceed the limit numerous times.

_________________
IDFIMH

This appeared in both articles, and both times has no basis in law.

_________________
IDFIMH

It's also worth mentioning that criminal courts sometimes deal with civil matters, and can grant applications based on 'balance of probabilities'.

Anti-social Behaviour Orders (not what they are called now), or Domestic Violence Prevention Orders, are a couple of civil orders that, if breached, can lead to criminal sentences.

_________________
IDFIMH