Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:52 pm

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 5:33 am
Posts: 4561
Ooft :shock:

And it wasn't an absolute refusal either - just a front footwell one [-(


Taxi driver's licence revoked after refusing to allow guide dog in the front of his car

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/n ... front-car/

A TAXI driver who had his licence revoked after refusing to carry a guide dog in the front of his car has been ordered to pay thousands of pounds.

Nasar Perwez was ordered to pay costs of £3,848 when his appeal against a decision by Hyndburn Council to revoke his private hire driver’s licence was dismissed at Blackburn Magistrates Court.

Mr Perwez, 41, of Worcester Road, Blackburn, had his private hire drivers licence revoked by the council’s licensing judicial committee in October last year following a complaint from a man that Mr Perwez had refused to carry his assistance dog in the front of his private hire vehicle.

He had been booked to carry a passenger and guide dog.

On arriving at the passenger’s house, he loaded some articles into the boot, but then insisted the guide dog ride on its own in the rear of his vehicle, despite the passenger explaining that the dog was trained to sit at his feet in the front passenger footwell.

Mr Perwez then unloaded the articles and left them on the side of the road, causing difficulty for the passenger who could not see them, and who was helped to retrieve them by his 92-year-old mother.

The magistrates heard how the refusal to carry the guide dog where it had been trained to travel meant that both the dog and owner would become distressed, and that the refusal had affected the passenger’s confidence in travelling.

The magistrates found that Mr Perwez had been inconsistent in his recall of the incident and that his testimony in court varied from interviews by licensing officers.

They determined that the decision of the council that Mr Perwez is not a fit and proper person to hold a private hire driver’s licence was correct.

Cllr Melissa Fisher, chair of the licensing judicial committee, said: “Hyndburn Borough Council take customer safety very seriously and will always fully investigate any complaints received and take any appropriate action to ensure that members of the public can have confidence when getting into a vehicle licensed by this council.

“The council will always do everything we can to ensure that people who use our licensed vehicles are not discriminated against in any way and the actions of the driver were totally unacceptable.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 6:30 pm
Posts: 43919
Location: 1066 Country
Seems this issue is one of whether the dog should go in the foot well, or in the back. Not sure if the back is the boot or the rear seats.

When I had a long discussion with a fella from one of the blind charities he agreed with me that it wasn't unreasonable for a driver to request the customer and their dog sit on the back seats.

I couldn't agree more. Quite why it matters to the customer if they sit on the back seat I'm not really sure. If anything there is more room.

With that in mind I'm assuming the fella in the article wanted the dog to sit in the boot, which I view as being unreasonable.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 5:33 am
Posts: 4561
Sussex wrote:
When I had a long discussion with a fella from one of the blind charities he agreed with me that it wasn't unreasonable for a driver to request the customer and their dog sit on the back seats.

I couldn't agree more. Quite why it matters to the customer if they sit on the back seat I'm not really sure. If anything there is more room.

Yes, was thinking about that, but could just about see the passenger insisting on sitting in the front.

And maybe this bit is instructive - that could be why the passenger wanted both to be in the front:

Quote:
The magistrates heard how the refusal to carry the guide dog where it had been trained to travel meant that both the dog and owner would become distressed.


Sussex wrote:
With that in mind I'm assuming the fella in the article wanted the dog to sit in the boot, which I view as being unreasonable.

This sentence below contrasts the 'boot' with the 'rear of the vehicle', so I was assuming it was the back seats rather than the boot, but no way of knowing for sure:

Quote:
On arriving at the passenger’s house, he loaded some articles into the boot, but then insisted the guide dog ride on its own in the rear of his vehicle...

I'd also contrast a proper 'boot' with a hatchback, most obviously. I wouldn't put a dog in a proper boot, but a hatchback might be OK, at least if the dog wasn't enclosed by the cover.

But if it was a guide dog I wouldn't have any problem with the dog in the front footwell, obviously.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 07, 2019 10:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:05 am
Posts: 72
"Im sorry, but I don't believe my airbags are suitable for an assistance dog and a passenger to travel in the front together. I'm happy for you both to travel in the back seat".

I don't think such a response could be held to be unreasonable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 7:45 am
Posts: 9842
Location: Clandestine, soon to be Russia.
He deserves to lose his badge and living, I hope he struggles the rest of his life the gain employment and pay off the debt of over £4000


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:36 pm
Posts: 859
Karga wrote:
"Im sorry, but I don't believe my airbags are suitable for an assistance dog and a passenger to travel in the front together. I'm happy for you both to travel in the back seat".

I don't think such a response could be held to be unreasonable.


This would only be a reasonable excuse if the car had knee airbags or the dog was a Great Dane!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Sussex and 47 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