Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Tue Apr 28, 2026 8:39 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
Taxi driver banned for watching videos while transporting BLIND passengers

A black cab driver who watched videos on his mobile phone while transporting BLIND people around Liverpool has been taken off the road. Cabbie Nazeed Hyseni has had his Hackney Carriage licence suspended for 28 days by the city council after being found to have failed to ensure the safety of his passengers.

Hyensi, 34, of Canon Road, Anfield, picked up a party of four outside Lime Street Station in March of last year. Three of the party were registered blind, with one having a guide dog. The passengers, who were all in their 60s, were travelling to Old Swan.

Licensing Committee members heard that during the journey, the fully-sighted member of the party became aware that Hyseni had his mobile phone switched on and was watching videos on his lap as he drove. The passengers claimed that when they urged the cabbie to concentrate on his driving he ignored them. When the party got out of the taxi they told Hyseni that he was not going to be given a tip because they were unhappy with his service, to which he replied: “It’s none of your business.”

One of the passengers immediately complained to the City Council’s Licensing Team. Hyseni was asked to make a statement about the incident. He denied the allegation, claiming he was unaware that his phone was on his lap and claimed that the passengers were rude to him. The committee rejected Hyseni’s version of events, banning him from working as a taxi driver in the city for 28 days.

He initially appealed against the ruling to the City’s Magistrates Court. When this was rejected he appealed to the Crown Court, which again rejected his appeal. Presiding over the appeal, Judge Brian Cummings, QC, said Hyseni should never have appealed the Committee’s decision.

Judge Cummings went on to describe Hyseni’s conduct as ‘disgraceful’, before telling him to: “wake up to his responsibilities as a taxi driver”. The Judge also praised the passengers for their public spirit in complaining which would help protect other passengers from experiencing a similar journey.

As well as being taken off the road, Hyseni was ordered to pay the council’s full legal costs.

Welcoming the decision, Chair of Liverpool City Council’s Licensing Committee, Councillor Christine Banks said: “This was clearly a distressing ordeal for the passengers. Hyseni’s actions put their safety and the safety of other road users and pedestrians at risk. As a consequence he has lost his livelihood for 28 days and will be faced with a hefty legal bill.” Cllr Banks added: “We take incidents such as this extremely seriously and we hope it sends the message that we will not tolerate this sort of behaviour.”

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20852
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
28 day suspension is that the right punishment ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57347
Location: 1066 Country
edders23 wrote:
28 day suspension is that the right punishment ?

Not really sure, and I'm not a fan of suspensions anyway.

The fella committed a criminal offence, it does beg the question why the council didn't refer the matter to the police.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 27, 2018 8:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:56 pm
Posts: 2553
Sussex wrote:
edders23 wrote:
28 day suspension is that the right punishment ?

Not really sure, and I'm not a fan of suspensions anyway.

The fella committed a criminal offence, it does beg the question why the council didn't refer the matter to the police.



Agreed that would have been the right course of action for any Council who claim PUBLIC SAFETY is first priority in any licensing regime.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cerberus and 313 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