Taxi Driver Online

Interesting amount of detail about the booking process here. Seems there was an attempt to cook the books after the event to get the driver off the hook. Obviously didn't work, but would be interesting to know why another car turned up at the pick-up point and was sitting behind Hussain.

Taxi driver found guilty of refusing to take blind woman's guide dog in his cab

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/wes ... g-15859354

Quran Hussain was caught by an undercover Kirklees Council officer following reports that drivers were refusing disabled passengers in the area


Image: Huddersfield Examiner

A taxi driver who refused to take a blind woman and her guide dog was caught as part of a huge crackdown on cabbies breaking the law.

Qurban Hussain was booked by a test purchaser carrying out checks on private hire drivers for Kirklees Council.

The operation came following reports that there were taxi drivers in the area refusing to pick up disabled passengers and their assistance dogs.

The 47-year-old, who works for Pennine Heckmondwike Cars, was booked for a pickup from Morrisons in Heckmondwike at 1pm on June 23 last year.

He denied any wrongdoing but was found guilty following a trial at Kirklees Magistrates' Court.

Gareth Henderson-Moore, prosecuting, said: "On that date Kirklees Council was conducting a covert operation which involved an officer from the council making a booking for a taxi.

"When the taxi arrived she was accompanied by a member of the public who is registered blind and needs an assistance dog to identify whether drivers would accept the booking."

He told magistrates that one of these volunteers on the day was Donna Wood-Brignall, an enforcement officer for Kirklees who was asked to carry out some test purchasing with the licensing team.

Mr Henderson-Moore told the Huddersfield court: "She made a booking with Pennine Heckmondwike Cars on the council's behalf and this driver (Hussain) was booked for the job.

"He attended at the pickup location and there was no issue with accepting the booking until he saw the assistance dog whereby he refused the booking and said he didn't take dogs and told her to get in the car behind."

Ms Wood-Brignall said in evidence that it had been brought to the council's attention that some taxi drivers in the area were refusing to take assistance dogs or were overcharging the customer if they did.

She said that on the day of the operation she booked a taxi to take her to the Obediah Brooke Wetherspoons pub in Cleckheaton and was quoted a fare of £4.50.

When asked who the car was for she replied 'Donna' and did not mention that it was for an assistance dog.

She told the court that she was accompanied by a blind woman and her dog and the idea was that they would go through her daily routine.

Ms Wood-Brignall said: "I approached the taxi and said 'are you for Donna?' and he said 'yes. I asked if he was for the Obediah pub and he said 'yes' and had no problem at that point.

"I then got hold of the door to open it for the passenger. He (the driver) lent forward past me and said 'you have dog?'and I said 'yes'.

"He shook his head and said 'no'. I asked him why and said it's an assistance dog and can get into a cab.

"I said it's part of his licence under the Equality Act to allow the dog into the car because it's a working dog and he still said 'no'."

She said that once it was clear that Hussain was refusing to take the dog she made the agreed hand signal to two enforcement officers who then came over and spoke with him.

Andrew Prescott, a licensing and enforcement officer for Kirklees Council, was one of the officers involved in the test purchase.

He sad that Hussain also told him that he didn't take dogs and suggested that the customer took the taxi behind him.

Mr Prescott later went to his firm's office in Heckmondwike and examined the log of the bookings taken. He said that the comment 'dog booking' had been added but the log appeared to have been altered several times.


Image: Huddersfield Examiner

Mr Wood-Brignall told magistrates: "Any mention of a dog is excluded in the booking, the idea being to test the drivers when they arrive.

"It says 'dog car' in the book but there's no way that the operator could have known about its presence at the time."

Hussain, of Thomas Street in Heckmondwike, pleaded not guilty to failing or refusing to carry out a booking for a disabled person accompanied by an assistance dog.

His solicitor Khalid Hussain said that there was no evidence that the call taker asked Hussain to pick up Ms Wood-Brignall.

He told magistrates: "He said that that he couldn't take her and the other driver was there to take her.

"Whether or not he takes the dog is of no consequence. He made it clear he was not the driver allocated."

Mr Hussain added that a number of entries in the books had been altered before and after the date of the incident and there was no evidence that any of these related to Hussain.

But magistrates found the case proved against Hussain due to the credible evidence of the witnesses and fined him £120. He was ordered to pay £700 towards prosecution costs and £30 victim surcharge.

So how does the exemption thingy work if the passenger doesn't have to inform the office that they have a guide dog? Does the car just show up then (legitimately) refuses the guide dog, and then another car has to be sent?

I suppose it could work like that, but the proper thing would be to inform the office and give them a copy of the exemption. Same should also apply for WAV work exemption.

_________________
IDFIMH

Guessing to pick up another punter, or just dropped there.

Oh and is that the dodgiest looking booking office in the UK?

_________________
IDFIMH

But how does the office know that it's a guide dog run? The essence of the test purchase exercise is that the customer *doesn't* tell the office that they have a guide dog, so how does the office know not to send a driver who has an exemption certificate?

They don't.

But the driver can explain to the punter and get another car sent.

Down here we have about 1,500 licensed drivers and I doubt more than half a dozen exemptions.

I don't have an exemption and have been sent to less than a dozen guide dog jobs in the last 20 years.

_________________
IDFIMH

Well that's my question cleared up, then

But in practice the punter will tell the office they have a guide dog.

_________________
IDFIMH

Got there in the end

The fact is that dogs are considered 'unclean' in the Muslim faith ,they are not used to owning one and sometimes consequently they are actually scared of dogs even the smallest of dogs .I notice that anytime a fellow driver has visited my house.

Although most would I don't see why there should be any requirement to tell the taxi office as it is assumed all cars must take the guide dog

Most of my Muslim drivers WILL take (Non guide) dogs provided they are smaller dogs and can travel in the foot well. I.E. away from where the dog might come into contact with the driver. As for allergies well I'm allergic to cats but i still carry cats (in a cat box) as long as you don't come into contact with the animal is there is negligible risk

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

I don't think there is a requirement, it's just that most guide dog owners do as a matter of course.

_________________
IDFIMH

Well that assumption is wrong, then, because a driver might have an exemption certificate.

Which gets back to my original question regarding possible practical problems - if the passenger doesn't mention the dog, and an exempt driver rolls up, then obviously neither the passenger nor the driver wants that.

I can see why a passenger might *not* mention a guide dog - because the office might use a made up excuse not to send a car - particularly as there's no legal obligation to mention the dog in advance.

Doubt it happens very often, because in the vast majority of cases the dog will be mentioned up front, and even if it isn't then chances of an exempt driver turning up probably pretty remote, but just a potential problem that came to mind when reading the article.