Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun May 03, 2026 3:21 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 2:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18538
Think there's a lot of Erewash-plated cars working in Derby, but I don't think there's a cross-border element here - he just happens to live in Derby, but was licensed by Erewash Council, and the rank he was plying at is in the Erewash Council area.


Taxi driver caught without license slapped with hefty fine

https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/d ... ne-3817001

His vehicle was deemed unsafe to drive

A taxi driver has been slapped with a hefty fine after being caught operating a hackney carriage illegally.

Muhammad Asif Farid was ordered to pay £690 after being found guilty of plying for hire without having a license.

Farid, of Molineux Street, Derby, was spotted by off-duty Erewash Borough Council licensing officers while waiting in his vehicle at the Ilkeston Market Place taxi rank in March last year.

The 40-year-old pleaded not guilty to the offence but was convicted by a bench of three magistrates at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court on Thursday, January 30.

The court was told he had not submitted his renewal application and supporting documentation before the expiry of his hackney carriage vehicle licence on February 24, 2019.

His vehicle had failed the council’s depot inspection and was deemed unsafe to drive.

He required a re-test once the work had been carried out.

The next available date for the re-test was March 5, but he was seen in the Ilkeston rank on March 1 and was told by the licensing officers he had no licence and that should leave the queue.

Councillor Garry Hickton, Erewash Borough Council’s lead member for environment, says: “Licensing rules are there for a reason and we take any breach seriously.

"We require the highest standards from taxi drivers in the borough and on this occasion Mr Farid did not meet them.

“It should serve as a warning that we will always take action.”

Farid, who is now properly licensed, was fined £100 for the offence and was ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £30 and pay the council’s full costs of £560, making a total of £690.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 2:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18538
Quote:
Farid, who is now properly licensed, was fined £100 for the offence and was ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £30 and pay the council’s full costs of £560, making a total of £690.

Oh, so he's getting to keep his badge and plate, then? [-(

£100 doesn't seem much of a fine, although council's costs of £560 seems hefty enough.

But I'm sure someone on here can give us chapter and verse :-o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20863
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
StuartW wrote:
Quote:
Farid, who is now properly licensed, was fined £100 for the offence and was ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £30 and pay the council’s full costs of £560, making a total of £690.

Oh, so he's getting to keep his badge and plate, then? [-(

£100 doesn't seem much of a fine, although council's costs of £560 seems hefty enough.

But I'm sure someone on here can give us chapter and verse :-o



doubt it there's never been anyone on here from Erewash to my knowledge I did do a fare to Ilkeston on christmas eve about 28 years ago but that's the only time i have ever been there

I would assume it is down to the council to decide if he warrants being stripped of his badge with a resultant loss of fees for the council

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18538
edders23 wrote:
[doubt it there's never been anyone on here from Erewash to my knowledge I did do a fare to Ilkeston on christmas eve about 28 years ago but that's the only time i have ever been there

I meant 'chapter and verse' with regard to the fine and costs :-o

Good to know you've been to Ilkeston, though - if I'd had to guess I'd have said it was in Yorkshire :shock:

And I thought Erewash was something you bought at the chemist :badgrin:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20863
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
StuartW wrote:
edders23 wrote:
[doubt it there's never been anyone on here from Erewash to my knowledge I did do a fare to Ilkeston on christmas eve about 28 years ago but that's the only time i have ever been there

I meant 'chapter and verse' with regard to the fine and costs :-o

Good to know you've been to Ilkeston, though - if I'd had to guess I'd have said it was in Yorkshire :shock:

And I thought Erewash was something you bought at the chemist :badgrin:



named for the river Erewash which I think is a tributary of the Trent (coal and steel country !)

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 12:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2018 10:05 am
Posts: 145
The fine is based on income. He's probably one of the guys that manages to work every hour under the sun but somehow manage to earn enough not to have to pay the taxman anything.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57356
Location: 1066 Country
Quote:
£100 doesn't seem much of a fine, although council's costs of £560 seems hefty enough.

But I'm sure someone on here can give us chapter and verse :-o

Fine based on income. So if I was guessing he told the court he earns £200 a week, and the offence is an A Band fine, which is 50% of weekly income.

Costs are justified because a not guilty trial took place, and witnesses would have needed to be called to give evidence and a trial would have needed to be prepared for.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18538
Thanks, chaps, I always forget fines based on income, which can, er, be fluid.

Sussex wrote:
Costs are justified because a not guilty trial took place, and witnesses would have needed to be called to give evidence and a trial would have needed to be prepared for.

Was thinking about the Exeter guide dog case and the nearly £2k requested by the council, while you suggested they might have actually been awarded £85? :shock:

But of course the Exeter driver pleaded guilty, so I suppose the costs here are in the right ball park =D>


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 811 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