Captain,
These are the area's of the consultation document that we asked to meet to discuss. For the record the GMB PDB St Albans section only agreed to those sections as listed below.
6th September 2008
Dear *****,
Thank you for the copies of the draft consultation given to members of the GMB PDB (Professional Drivers Branch).
Our local members have indicated below concerns that they have, in relation to the draft proposals, and the GMB PDB would be grateful if you could address those concerns in the final document.
Issues that need to be addressed in regards to the Draft Guidelines relating to convictions.
1. Best Practice Guidance (page 5)
We need to see the Taxi and Private hire Vehicle Licensing Best Practice Guidance issued by the Department of Transport.
2. Paragraph starting with “Where it is necessary…” (page 5)
When can the Authority depart SUBSTANTIALLY from its policy? Why is there a policy which the Authority needs to depart and in departing from it, why must it be substantial? This is a clear indication that the policy is not adequate in the first instance that it must be departed from for whatever reason.
3. Last paragraph on page 5
This paragraph states that the licensing authority’s aim is not to punish the applicant twice for an offence. However, it is clear that the point of this WHOLE DOCUMENT is to punish the applicant again for an offence for which he/she has been punished adequately in the courts of the land or summarily through statutory legislation. This paragraph will be referred to again and again because it contradicts almost all of the subsequent draft guidelines.
4. Suitability (page 6)
The onus is on the applicant to prove that he/she is a fit and proper person. We would like to know how are the present conditions which need to be fulfilled inadequate. The applicant needs to obtain an Enhanced Disclosure from the Criminal Records Bureau, a disclosure from the DVLA, a medical from the GP, a knowledge test which covers St. Albans, Harpenden, Redbourn, Wheathampstead, London Colony, Bricket Wood and everything in between, finger prints are taken, and a disability awareness program must be completed. Even joining the secret service probably does not require this many conditions to be met.
5. Convictions (page 6)
Why must fixed penalties be taken into account. Fixed penalties are imposed only in very minor cases and this clearly contradicts the last paragraph on page 5.
6. Fourth paragraph under Convictions
This states that “all convictions whether spent or live will be assessed”. Again clearly contradicting the last paragraph on page 5 and in addition it is contradictory in the wording because “spent” will be assessed which means the convictions will never be “spent”.
7. Not abusive- page 7
What if the driver is subject to unpleasant and dishonest behavior? Does the council believe that drivers should be subjected to such treatment because they can not answer back? Drivers are expected to address disputes through proper channels which would mean a 3 hour wait for the police to respond to a driver being attacked and is the council also expecting the abusive customer to wait patiently with the driver until the police arrive.
8. Protecting the public page 7
The council’s main priority is to protect the public. This raises the question as to who protects the driver. Is the council not aware that it is the lonely driver who is more vulnerable to physical attacks from the public and in other cases from false accusations and verbal abuse? We suggest that the council “cough up” for CCTV cameras for all the taxis that it licenses which would protect the driver as well as the customer. The council fees should cover the costs as the fees collected from taxi licensing do not equate to the expenditure made such as 1 badge (cost £2*), one MOGO plate (cost £8*, and other livery which probably costs the council no more than £30*. The cost of CCTV cameras is £195**( the CCTV is a one off cost whereas the badge fees are every 3 years and the vehicle licence fees are annual as well as any subsequent transfer fess.
(*figures are approximate based on fact the council purchases them in bulk. **figures taken from
http://www.radiorelay.co.uk/acatalog/CCTV.html)
9. History – page 7
Any person can make a series of complaints against a driver if they hold a grudge against him/ her and that would so easily create a “history”. What safeguards are there against this happening?
10. Driving Offences- page 8
Second paragraph. This blatantly contradicts the last paragraph on page 5 as to the council’s aim of not punishing the driver twice for the same offence.
11. 5 or less penalty points- page 8
Why are taxi drivers being treated like children whereas coach drivers allowed up to 9 points before any verbal warning and they carry up to 50 passengers? Are the lives of coach passengers less valuable than taxi passengers? Furthermore, yet again this contradicts the last paragraph on page 5.
12. 6 or more penalty points- page 8
We disagree with this proposal in its entirety as 6 points are so easily obtainable because the police spends a vast amount of its resources on hiding their speed cameras in unmarked vans and what if the exact persons who are to judge the driver have themselves points on their license, would that mean they are not fit and proper to judge because if they have committed the same offence they can not possibly be fit and proper to judge others.( this would include any licensing officer) Furthermore, yet again this contradicts the last paragraph on page 5.
13. Major Traffic offences-page 8
This paragraph needs clarification as to what evidence will be deemed sufficient.
14. Totting Up – page 9
More information is required as to the refusal procedure and the issues and factors that will be considered in relation to the subsequent refusal. If the driver has avoided disqualification in court due to the fact the court has taken the view that the driver would suffer “exceptional hardship” if his driving licence was taken from him and as a result he would lose his job. Then in such a case if the council refuses the taxi driver licence then it makes a mockery of the court’s view and the driver would most certainly suffer “exceptional hardship” due to holding a VALID driving licence yet unable to work. Furthermore, yet again this contradicts the last paragraph on page 5.
15. Motor Insurance Offences – page 10
Yet again this contradicts the last paragraph on page 5. However, we also view this as a serious issue and would suggest a 1 year period after the applicant’s DVLA licence has been restored rather than the 3 years.
16. Drunkenness - page 11
We agree with this proposed guideline and find it is acceptable.
17. Drug Offences – page 12
We agree with this proposed guideline and find it is acceptable.
18. Sexual offences – page 13
We agree with this proposed guideline and find it is acceptable.
19. Violence – page 14
We agree with the fact that violent criminals should not be taxi drivers but if the applicant is not normally of such a character but has been convicted, the circumstances of his conviction should be taken into account because any reasonable person may have a lapse of judgment and in the circumstances committed a single isolated offence. Furthermore, yet again this contradicts the last paragraph on page 5.
20. Dishonesty – page 15
What if the customer is dishonest? Many so called customers will make up stories to avoid paying the fare. What safeguards are there in place to protect the driver? The driver is in effect an employee of the council, in that the council dictates what vehicle he can drive, the council grants him the licence (vehicle and drivers), the council dictates what fares are to be charged (meters calibrated to the council’s tariffs) so then what safeguards does the council have in place to protect its own effective employees? If the fare is for a journey out of the district who determines the LEGAL fare?
21. Complaints Against Drivers – page 16
What has happened to the presumption of innocence? Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (Latin: the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies). The stance of the council should be one with the laws of the country. The council at present, because of the fact it licenses drivers, in cases involving complaints against drivers, the council goes on the defensive with the presumption that the driver is guilty until he proves his innocence. Thus the burden of proof is on the driver. This is unfair and has no basis in English law whatsoever. Furthermore, in most cases where the driver is a victim of unwarranted abuse, if the driver does complain there is no response from the police. The lack of response is most apparent when a member of the public does not pay. The usual response from the police is that it is a civil matter and the driver should take the matter up with the other party through the civil procedure channels. This however is inaccurate, because not paying a taxi fare is a criminal offence under section 3 of the Theft Act 1978 and the offender should be arrested. On the other issue of “the council will consider a history of complaints”. It is so easy for members of the public to make false accusations against any driver they hold a grudge against and that driver will automatically build up a “history”. Are there any safeguards against this?
22. Conclusion page 17
Fourth paragraph. The main purpose of this draft document appears to be to penalise the driver financially and to punish the driver again for any offence that he/she has been punished for by the courts.
23. Elapsed periods pages 11,12,13,14,15
Time and time again gaps of 2-3 years and 5-10 years are mentioned, but nowhere is any criteria which says when offence leads to a 5 year gap, and which offence leads to a 10 year gap. In short it’s very vague, and when you are dealing with working drivers livelihoods it should be crystal clear.
On behalf of the GMB PDB members working in St Albans, I request a meeting to discuss these issues at your earliest convenience. I am on annual leave from the 9th September to 18th September 2008
Kind regards
Mick Hildreth
GMB PDB National (Provincial) Hackney Carriage & Private Hire Secretary.
Login
Register
FAQ
