Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Tue May 05, 2026 1:23 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2014 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
Minicab company fined £1,300 for failing to report accident involving unlicensed driver

A minicab company has been fined £1,300 for failing to report an accident which involved an unlicensed driver.

Hatfield Heath-based Car Service Travel Limited was prosecuted by Uttlesford District Council and a ruling handed down by Colchester Magistrates’ Court on April 8.

The company was prosecuted for two offences – operating a private hire vehicle which was driven by an unlicensed driver and failing to report an accident which involved a private hire vehicle.

No one appeared to represent Car Service Travel Limited. The council proved the summary offences in the company’s absence.

The company was fined £1,000 for the offence of using an unlicensed driver and £300 for the offence of failing to notify an accident.

There was a victim surcharge of £90 added, and the company was also ordered to pay costs of £731.

At a meeting of the Licensing & Environmental Health Committee in March, the committee revoked the operator’s licence for Car Service Travel Limited on the basis that it was not satisfied the company was a fit and proper person to hold an operator’s licence in view of the fact that it had used an unlicensed driver.

The time for appealing against that decision has now expired and no notice received that an appeal has been lodged.

The council’s licensing committee chairman, Cllr Doug Perry, said: “I am pleased by the decision that the magistrates’ court has made.

“There is no excuse for not holding the proper licences or for failing to report an accident.

“Aside from being criminal offences, both are irresponsible acts. This is exactly the kind of case we should be using our powers to resolve and I’m delighted the magistrates agreed with our stance.”

source: http://www.saffronwaldenreporter.co.uk/ ... _1_3573743

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2014 3:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
captain cab wrote:

At a meeting of the Licensing & Environmental Health Committee in March, the committee revoked the operator’s licence for Car Service Travel Limited on the basis that it was not satisfied the company was a fit and proper person to hold an operator’s licence in view of the fact that it had used an unlicensed driver.


Is the operators license in the name of the company or in the name of a person?

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Apr 26, 2014 5:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57359
Location: 1066 Country
grandad wrote:
captain cab wrote:

At a meeting of the Licensing & Environmental Health Committee in March, the committee revoked the operator’s licence for Car Service Travel Limited on the basis that it was not satisfied the company was a fit and proper person to hold an operator’s licence in view of the fact that it had used an unlicensed driver.


Is the operators license in the name of the company or in the name of a person?

Not sure it matters, the directors or named folk on the license are the ones that are liable.

The court will go after the people behind the firm to recover the costs.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 706 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group