Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:35 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 6:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 4313
Well this is a most unusual report, for reasons which become obvious :-s


Seven taxi drivers in Somerset have licences revoked after failing to complete background checks

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/loc ... es-3180811

The background checks are essential to flag up any criminal convictions or other details which make them unfit to serve the public

Seven Somerset taxi drivers have had their licences revoked after failing to complete proper background checks.

Anyone wishing to drive a taxi, Hackney carriage or operate a private hire service must complete an interim check with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), to flag up any criminal convictions or other details which make them unfit to serve the public.

A Sedgemoor District Council licensing panel has decided to revoke the licence of seven drivers after they failed to complete these checks or respond to multiple attempts by officers to contact them.

Several of the drivers have already moved away from the area - and one has left the UK altogether.

The drivers were named in the agenda papers for the council's licensing panel, which met in Bridgwater on Tuesday morning (August 6).

None of the drivers attended the hearing in person, and no representations were made on their behalf, besides comments by the council's licensing officers.

The drivers whose licences have been revoked are:

Louis Brunskill (Bridgwater, self-employed): Mr Brunskill indicated via a phone call on May 28 that he did not wish to pursue his private hire driver licence. He was advised to surrender his driving badges immediately - but has not made any further contact since then

Justin Bushen (Bridgwater, H Cabs): Mr Bushen has moved away from Sedgemoor to take another job, but indicated he wanted to keep his licence to "keep his options open" for weekend work. He failed to attend an appointment on June 11, made by H Cabs, and did not respond to separate emails

Christopher Mant (outside SDC area, Sybaris Chauffeurs): Mr Mant failed to respond to phone calls and emails on May 28. His employer subsequently confirmed he had moved away to Oxfordshire in early-May

Cormac McDonagh (outside SDC area, Broadway Taxis): Mr McDonagh did not respond to phone messages left on June 3 and 12. His employer later confirmed he had left his position at the end of May and was possibly returning to Birmingham to begin a university course

Tiago Raimundo (Bridgwater, self-employed): Mr Raimundo was contacted on June 3, and indicated he would surrender his private hire licence after he returned from a holiday in Portugal. He did not respond to further contact until July 16, when he indicated he had permanently moved to the country and would not be returning to the UK

Karen Scott (West Huntspill, Curtisee Cabs): Ms Scott told officers on June 13 she was not aware she had to register online for DBS checks. Although she wished to retain her Hackney licence, she said she could not afford a DBS application and did not respond to further correspondence

Tom Sheppard (Highbridge, Curtisee Cabs): Mr Sheppard did not respond to phone messages left on May 28 and June 12. His employer said he had left "two to three months ago" (possibly before the first phone call), and speculated he was "now working for a delivery service"

An additional driver - Abdur Tarafdar from Highbridge - was given more time to complete his DBS checks due to a "family emergency" which had taken him out of the country.

Licensing officer Simon Guest said: "He has never been any trouble whatsoever over the last six years.

"This seems to have because of a genuine family emergency. I would recommend we allow him more time."

The panel agreed to give Mr Tarafdar until August 31 to complete the necessary checks, noting he was not likely to return to the UK until August 12.

A further driver, Aneka Woodman, was due to have her licence revoked by the panel, but she surrendered her Hackney licence before the hearing, meaning no further action was needed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 8:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 43741
Location: 1066 Country
Why did they feel the need to revoke?

They should have just suspended until the license lapsed?

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 10:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 13076
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
Quote:
an interim check with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)


I think this needs explaining properly I am assuming that their DBS isn't done at the same time as the badge otherwise they would not have needed to undergo a DBS check or is this council requiring more frequent than every 3 years

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 43741
Location: 1066 Country
edders23 wrote:
Quote:
an interim check with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS)


I think this needs explaining properly I am assuming that their DBS isn't done at the same time as the badge otherwise they would not have needed to undergo a DBS check or is this council requiring more frequent than every 3 years

Reading the report to councillors it appears all driver licenses are renewed on the same day, end of November I think.

A few years back the council mandated that all drivers sign up to the online DBS check process.

Clearly those drivers haven't signed up, and it appears they have no intention to.

I suspect many of them have merely left the trade.

TBH if I was them I would have the right hump. They have had their details put online when they have done nothing wrong, other than found a new trade.

As I said above it would have been better all round if the council had just let their licenses lapse.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 4313
Sussex wrote:
TBH if I was them I would have the right hump. They have had their details put online when they have done nothing wrong, other than found a new trade.


To be fair, it does seem that in most cases the council has tried to contact the driver and/or their op/proprietor on several occasions, without response.

I've lived at my current address for almost three years, and it's only in the past few weeks I've stopped getting mail addressed to the previous occupants. And not just junk mail either - mainly stuff like debt statements/reminders/debt collectors, new bank cards and suchlike.

Stuck maybe 100+ letters back in the post marked 'return to sender', but they just kept on coming, even after I started opening the most persistent ones and was emailing/phoning the senders (didn't want debt collectors knocking on my door).

Anyway, had a knock on the door yesterday, and it's a lady in a wee Fife Council van looking for 'Clare', who I think was one of the above mentioned.

Don't know the purpose of the visit (I think one of the previous occupants may have been a teacher, so maybe something to do with that), but nearest council office is about five miles away, and she might have actually had a wasted round trip of 60 miles or more.

So the badge stuff kind of reminds me of this - lots of fannying about for councils and businesses because people can't be bothered taking a few simple steps to sort themselves out (or are trying to hide something), which of course ye and me are ultimately paying for :?

So not really a lot of sympathy for these (former) badge holders, although what's maybe a bit over the top is in comparison to those who have done a lot worse yet their names are kept from the public gaze :roll:

(And the Fife Council person woke me up while I was trying to get some kip, and couldn't get back to sleep :evil: )


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 43741
Location: 1066 Country
Quote:
To be fair, it does seem that in most cases the council has tried to contact the driver and/or their op/proprietor on several occasions, without response.

That's not the point.

Will there be a license panel for those not completing a medical, one for those not filling in a new application form, one for those not filling in any DVLA checks?

These people have clearly left the trade, the council did not need to do anything other than suspend till the license lapsed.

This should never have gone to committee, and the council should never have published their names.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 6:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 13076
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
I still get letters addressed to my father who has been dead for 3 years :roll:

_________________
Taxis Are Public Transport too

Join the campaign to get April fools jokes banned for 364 days a year !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 11:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 4313
Sussex wrote:
Will there be a license panel for those not completing a medical, one for those not filling in a new application form, one for those not filling in any DVLA checks?


Depends on the precise circumstances - if it's a renewal or new application then clearly the process won't be completed and the badge will either lapse or the application won't go ahead until the applicant has provided the relevant information.

Presumably the chap who was abroad got in touch and to that degree was excused because of the 'family emergency'.

Sussex wrote:
These people have clearly left the trade, the council did not need to do anything other than suspend till the license lapsed.


Well if they just can't be bothered even acknowledging the council the I don't have much sympathy, irrespective of the legal niceties. Some people just go out of their way to be awkward. As far as any injustice is concerned, it would be near the bottom of my list of priorities.

Sussex wrote:
his should never have gone to committee, and the council should never have published their names.


Suspect it's partly the press to blame for any injustice here - even if other councils might have published the names and the details of their individual circumstances, I doubt of the average local newspaper would report such 'intimate' details.


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: Google [Bot] and 65 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group