Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failure

Burgess Hill taxi driver stripped of licence after random check

https://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/b ... -1-8703034

A Burgess Hill taxi driver has been stripped of his licence for driving an unsafe vehicle, Mid Sussex District Council has said.

Mr S Miah of Newport Road, Burgess Hill, was stopped on May 25, by a district council licensing officer, who found the vehicle had a defective tyre and no MOT certificate.

When questioned by the officer during the random check, Mr Miah admitted that he knew his vehicle did not have a valid MOT, the council said.

A spokesman said: “The hackney carriage had failed its MOT test on March 28, which recorded seven serious faults and three further advisory items.

“In spite of this, Mr Miah knowingly continued to carry passengers in the vehicle, racking up a further 3047 miles until he was stopped by the council licensing officer.

“The district council licensing committee considered the case on Thursday, July 26, and found that Mr Miah was not a fit and proper person to continue to hold a hackney carriage driver’s licence.

“Mr Miah’s licence, as well as that of the defective vehicle, was revoked on July 27, on the grounds of public safety.”

Mr Miah appealed the council’s decision but it was rejected by Brighton Magistrates Court on October 24, the council said.

Councillor Norman Webster, MSDC cabinet member for community, added: “Mr Miah’s car was found to be in a very poor condition and not covered by a valid MOT. To carry on driving the car in the state that it was in demonstrates a serious lack of care and professionalism.

“Our primary role as a licensing authority is the protection of the public and Mr Miah’s failure to ensure his vehicle was roadworthy demonstrates just how little regard he has for passenger safety.

“The licensing committee was left with no choice other than to revoke Mr Miah’s licence and I hope this decision serves as a valuable lesson to other taxi drivers about how important it is to ensure your vehicle is properly maintained.”

StuartW wrote:

This is probably the best example of why testing of vehicles is done in house,the plate would have been either suspended or not renewed by the Council and passenger safety would have been assured.

I think this is council incompetence not because they don't do in house testing

edders23 wrote:

I think this is council incompetence not because they don't do in house testing

Not sure if the council has done anything out of the ordinary here. I would imagine the only time they require to see the MoT is during the relicensing process.

The MoT process here is presumably independent of the council's own testing procedures.

A certificate of compliance is the same as an MOT as far as road worthiness. I read it as the vehicle had failed council test otherwise it would not be an MOT failure as it would have a valid certificate of compliance. I.E. the vehicle should not still have it's plate if it failed

This is probably the best example of why testing of vehicles is done in house,the plate would have been either suspended or not renewed by the Council and passenger safety would have been assured.

Author:	StuartW [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:48 am ]
Post subject:	Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failure
Burgess Hill taxi driver stripped of licence after random check https://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/b ... -1-8703034 A Burgess Hill taxi driver has been stripped of his licence for driving an unsafe vehicle, Mid Sussex District Council has said. Mr S Miah of Newport Road, Burgess Hill, was stopped on May 25, by a district council licensing officer, who found the vehicle had a defective tyre and no MOT certificate. When questioned by the officer during the random check, Mr Miah admitted that he knew his vehicle did not have a valid MOT, the council said. A spokesman said: “The hackney carriage had failed its MOT test on March 28, which recorded seven serious faults and three further advisory items. “In spite of this, Mr Miah knowingly continued to carry passengers in the vehicle, racking up a further 3047 miles until he was stopped by the council licensing officer. “The district council licensing committee considered the case on Thursday, July 26, and found that Mr Miah was not a fit and proper person to continue to hold a hackney carriage driver’s licence. “Mr Miah’s licence, as well as that of the defective vehicle, was revoked on July 27, on the grounds of public safety.” Mr Miah appealed the council’s decision but it was rejected by Brighton Magistrates Court on October 24, the council said. Councillor Norman Webster, MSDC cabinet member for community, added: “Mr Miah’s car was found to be in a very poor condition and not covered by a valid MOT. To carry on driving the car in the state that it was in demonstrates a serious lack of care and professionalism. “Our primary role as a licensing authority is the protection of the public and Mr Miah’s failure to ensure his vehicle was roadworthy demonstrates just how little regard he has for passenger safety. “The licensing committee was left with no choice other than to revoke Mr Miah’s licence and I hope this decision serves as a valuable lesson to other taxi drivers about how important it is to ensure your vehicle is properly maintained.”

Author:	Nidge2 [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:39 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
What a bellend

Author:	heathcote [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
StuartW wrote: Burgess Hill taxi driver stripped of licence after random check https://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/b ... -1-8703034 A Burgess Hill taxi driver has been stripped of his licence for driving an unsafe vehicle, Mid Sussex District Council has said. Mr S Miah of Newport Road, Burgess Hill, was stopped on May 25, by a district council licensing officer, who found the vehicle had a defective tyre and no MOT certificate. When questioned by the officer during the random check, Mr Miah admitted that he knew his vehicle did not have a valid MOT, the council said. A spokesman said: “The hackney carriage had failed its MOT test on March 28, which recorded seven serious faults and three further advisory items. “In spite of this, Mr Miah knowingly continued to carry passengers in the vehicle, racking up a further 3047 miles until he was stopped by the council licensing officer. “The district council licensing committee considered the case on Thursday, July 26, and found that Mr Miah was not a fit and proper person to continue to hold a hackney carriage driver’s licence. “Mr Miah’s licence, as well as that of the defective vehicle, was revoked on July 27, on the grounds of public safety.” Mr Miah appealed the council’s decision but it was rejected by Brighton Magistrates Court on October 24, the council said. Councillor Norman Webster, MSDC cabinet member for community, added: “Mr Miah’s car was found to be in a very poor condition and not covered by a valid MOT. To carry on driving the car in the state that it was in demonstrates a serious lack of care and professionalism. “Our primary role as a licensing authority is the protection of the public and Mr Miah’s failure to ensure his vehicle was roadworthy demonstrates just how little regard he has for passenger safety. “The licensing committee was left with no choice other than to revoke Mr Miah’s licence and I hope this decision serves as a valuable lesson to other taxi drivers about how important it is to ensure your vehicle is properly maintained.” This is probably the best example of why testing of vehicles is done in house,the plate would have been either suspended or not renewed by the Council and passenger safety would have been assured.

Author:	edders23 [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
our vehicles are tested by MOT registered garages they have to notify the council if a vehicle fails on anything the same day even something minor like a bulb out. The council will then phone you 09.00 the next day and order you to hand your plate in until vehicle has passed I think this is council incompetence not because they don't do in house testing

Author:	MR T [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
heathcote wrote: StuartW wrote: Burgess Hill taxi driver stripped of licence after random check https://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/b ... -1-8703034 A Burgess Hill taxi driver has been stripped of his licence for driving an unsafe vehicle, Mid Sussex District Council has said. Mr S Miah of Newport Road, Burgess Hill, was stopped on May 25, by a district council licensing officer, who found the vehicle had a defective tyre and no MOT certificate. When questioned by the officer during the random check, Mr Miah admitted that he knew his vehicle did not have a valid MOT, the council said. A spokesman said: “The hackney carriage had failed its MOT test on March 28, which recorded seven serious faults and three further advisory items. “In spite of this, Mr Miah knowingly continued to carry passengers in the vehicle, racking up a further 3047 miles until he was stopped by the council licensing officer. “The district council licensing committee considered the case on Thursday, July 26, and found that Mr Miah was not a fit and proper person to continue to hold a hackney carriage driver’s licence. “Mr Miah’s licence, as well as that of the defective vehicle, was revoked on July 27, on the grounds of public safety.” Mr Miah appealed the council’s decision but it was rejected by Brighton Magistrates Court on October 24, the council said. Councillor Norman Webster, MSDC cabinet member for community, added: “Mr Miah’s car was found to be in a very poor condition and not covered by a valid MOT. To carry on driving the car in the state that it was in demonstrates a serious lack of care and professionalism. “Our primary role as a licensing authority is the protection of the public and Mr Miah’s failure to ensure his vehicle was roadworthy demonstrates just how little regard he has for passenger safety. “The licensing committee was left with no choice other than to revoke Mr Miah’s licence and I hope this decision serves as a valuable lesson to other taxi drivers about how important it is to ensure your vehicle is properly maintained.” This is probably the best example of why testing of vehicles is done in house,the plate would have been either suspended or not renewed by the Council and passenger safety would have been assured. And how do you come to that conclusion. ?

Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failure http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33529	Page 1 of 1

Author:	StuartW [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
edders23 wrote: I think this is council incompetence not because they don't do in house testing Not sure if the council has done anything out of the ordinary here. I would imagine the only time they require to see the MoT is during the relicensing process. The MoT process here is presumably independent of the council's own testing procedures.

Author:	edders23 [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 3:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
StuartW wrote: edders23 wrote: I think this is council incompetence not because they don't do in house testing Not sure if the council has done anything out of the ordinary here. I would imagine the only time they require to see the MoT is during the relicensing process. The MoT process here is presumably independent of the council's own testing procedures. A certificate of compliance is the same as an MOT as far as road worthiness. I read it as the vehicle had failed council test otherwise it would not be an MOT failure as it would have a valid certificate of compliance. I.E. the vehicle should not still have it's plate if it failed

Author:	StuartW [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 4:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
edders23 wrote: A certificate of compliance is the same as an MOT as far as road worthiness. I read it as the vehicle had failed council test otherwise it would not be an MOT failure as it would have a valid certificate of compliance. I.E. the vehicle should not still have it's plate if it failed I read it as totally the opposite - the MoT was completely independent of the council's testing procedure, so it was only by chance via a spot check that the council detected the fact that the vehicle wasn't MoTed. When I started in Fife the council would ask to see the MoT when you plated the car, but if you got a three year plate and were willing to take the chance then you could go almost three years without an MoT, until the council asked to see it again. Of course, you need an MoT to get taxed, so to that extent you couldn't go three years without an MoT, but if you were willing to risk an untaxed vehicle then in theory you could go without an MoT. Or SORN it - wasn't there a piece recently about a SORNed plated cab in Bradford that the police picked up via ANPR? It's only recently that Fife Council have started insisting on seeing an MoT certificate before they'll perform the annual inspection on a cab, but I think this was because some people buying new cars weren't MoTing them after one year as required by the national law. And as far as the DVLA are concerned I don't think they identify a vehicle as an HC/PH, so there's no real way of ensuring compliance with an MoT from year one, unless an HC/PH licensing authority does it for them. But I assume Mid-Sussex is much like Fife, and the only regular check the council does on the MoT is when the car is plated/re-plated. Of course, it's now open to any Tom, Dick or Harry to check the MoT status of any car via the DVLA's online database, so in theory it would be easy enough for councils to check a cab has renewed its MoT.

Author:	StuartW [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:19 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
Quote: This is probably the best example of why testing of vehicles is done in house,the plate would have been either suspended or not renewed by the Council and passenger safety would have been assured. Assuming of course that the MoT here has anything to do with the council's inspection procedures, but as per above, in this case I'm assuming it doesn't.

Author:	Sussex [ Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Sussex driver worked car for 3,000 miles after MoT failu
I think the council did well in respect of enforcement. The fault lies with the owner/driver who believed he would get away with not getting his motor fixed. However his actions have advertised to others the consequences of running dodgy cabs.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/