Taxi Driver Online

Thought this rung a bell, but must be thinking of another article from the north of Scotland, involving a woman driver, maybe?

Anyway, this is quite interesting from the quasi-judicial perspective. Looks like it was a private sector solicitor acting for his client who objected to his licence, rather than any police involvement. And no sign of any criminal conviction or even civil litigation (although debt collectors were involved). Sure there was another case like this on here a few months ago as well...


Aberdeen taxi driver took thousands from widow’s bank account as she cared for dying husband

William Cameron's taxi licence has been revoked over claims he took £8,000 from the pensioner without her knowledge.


Image: Darrell Benns/DC Thomson

An Aberdeen taxi driver has been stripped of his licence after taking thousands of pounds from a widow’s bank account.

William Cameron is accused of withdrawing around £8,000 from the pensioner’s account without permission.

He had been trusted to take out money for her as she nursed her dying husband through illness in 2021.

She’s now raised fears she might not have been Mr Cameron’s only victim.

The taxi driver of 20 years, did not appear at his hearing in front of Aberdeen City Council’s licensing committee on Wednesday.

But he claims that he never once took money from his alleged victim’s account without permission.

On Wednesday night, Mr Cameron told The P&J he had not heard the committee’s ruling.

He declined to comment when informed his licence had been revoked.

‘Not fit and proper’ to be an Aberdeen taxi driver

Despite his claims of innocence, Aberdeen councillors unanimously voted to tear up his taxi licence, deeming him “not a fit and proper person” to have one.

Alasdair Taylor, a senior associate at Burnett and Reid, made the case for Mr Cameron to lose his job.

Solicitor Alasdair Taylor urged Aberdeen City Council's licensing committee to consider William Cameron's licence to be a taxi driver.

He raised a formal complaint in August about the taxi driver, on behalf of his then 71-year-old client.

In a written submission, Mr Taylor told councillors: “In 2021, [my client] spent much of
the year caring for her husband up until his death in August.

“While [she] was not housebound, due to the need to care for her husband, she rarely left the house.

“Over this period, she and her husband were befriended by William Cameron, a
taxi driver, who would regularly run errands for them, which included going to the ATM to withdraw money for her.”

Missing money uncovered after husband’s death

At that time, Mr Taylor said, the taxi driver was facing money troubles.

And the couple agreed to lend their friend cash.

But, after the death of her husband, Mr Taylor said it “became apparent that, when taking out money for [my client], Mr Cameron had also been withdrawing cash for his own use”.

“After being challenged on this, Mr Cameron admitted what he had done and agreed to repay the money but only did so to a limited extent,” he added.

The unauthorised cash withdrawals were reported to police.

Concerns widow ‘may not be the only individual of whom Aberdeen taxi driver has taken advantage’

But the woman wanted to settle the matter without any inevitable consequences for Mr Cameron’s job.

So in June 2022, the pair agreed a scheme for the taxi driver to pay back the £8,000 at a rate of £100 a week.

But, the solicitor Mr Taylor narrated: “It will come as no surprise to be informed that [Mr Cameron] failed to keep up the payments.”

Having paid back only £600, debt collectors were then enlisted to claw back the cash – to no avail.

The alleged theft has been raised again with police since but – “perhaps surprisingly,” said Mr Taylor – officers have “declined to take further action”.

He concluded: “Insofar as Mr Cameron has failed to take advantage of the opportunity given to him, and due to our client’s concerns that she may not be the only individual of whom he has taken advantage, she considers it appropriate that his actions be considered when assessing whether or not he is a fit and proper person to hold a taxi licence.”

Ruling on Aberdeen taxi driver Cameron’s licence delayed for six months

Mr Cameron, who had his hearing delayed last September and December while he sought legal advice, was not at Aberdeen Town House to face the charges.

In response to the solicitor’s 600-word submission, the – now former – taxi driver offered only 12.

“I did not take any money without permission.

“Sent from my iPhone.”

Licensing committee vice-convener Steve Delaney urged colleagues to revoke Mr Cameron’s licence as he was not a “fit and proper person” to hold one.

All agreed.


Image: Darrell Benns/DC Thomson

Since he agreed to pay money back, that certainly implies an element of dishonesty.

However, the fact that police declined to take action is one reason I don't trust local politicians to make decisions on people's livelihood like this

I'm guessing he is saying it was a loan, but now he can't afford to pay it back.

This will make the police think they can't get a conviction surpassing the 'beyond reasonable doubt' threshold.

Whereas the council only needs to pass the 'balance of probabilities' threshold.

He also didn't help himself by not turning up and merely sending in a text message.

_________________
IDFIMH

Another angle on the double jeopardy thing in Ireland - instead of councillors getting another go at criminal acquittals on a different standard of proof, in Ireland it looks like it's the police who do what councillors do here

So it's police who get a second go, effectively

I'd guess there's some due process, human rights or similar argument to be had on the fact that it's police are effectively having a second go after a criminal acquittal, but can't see any sign of that precise argument being made here...


Man acquitted of sexually assaulting daughter challenges taxi licence refusal

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/co ... e-refusal/

High Court asked to quash chief superintendent’s decision on grounds it is unreasonable, irrational and based on irrelevant matters

A man whose conviction for sexually assaulting his 19-year-old daughter was overturned is challenging a Garda decision to refuse him a taxi licence.

In High Court proceedings, he says he was proved innocent of the alleged wrongdoing but a chief superintendent later dealing with his small public service vehicle (SPSV) licence application told him “that’s not quite the case”.

He alleges the garda said in an interview that he has to operate “on the balance of probabilities” with regards to the allegations. To convict at a criminal trial, a jury or judge must be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt”.

The man says he was convicted of one count of sexual assault following a trial in 2017 but this was overturned by the Court of Appeal. He was acquitted by a unanimous jury verdict after a second trial in 2021. He denies all wrongdoing and says he has no other convictions.

Last September, the man says, the chief superintendent wrote to say he intended to refuse to grant a licence as he was not satisfied he is a “suitable person” to hold one due to “concerns raised by the allegation of a criminal act”.

Under the Taxi Regulation Act 2013, An Garda Síochána, as the current licensing authority, “shall not” grant an SPSV licence unless it is satisfied the applicant is a suitable person to hold one. Among the considerations listed in the relevant section of the 2013 Act, is whether the applicant is “of good character”, concerns raised by Garda members about the applicant’s suitability, relevant convictions and health.

The man, who cannot be named, alleges “it appears that the simple fact of these allegations having been made has been divorced from the outcome of the criminal proceedings” and was used as the “sole basis” to deny him an SPSV licence.

He says it “appears clear” the chief superintendent did not regard the outcome of the criminal proceedings as having vindicated his presumption of innocence.

He is asking the High Court to quash a chief superintendent’s decision on grounds that it is unreasonable, irrational and based on irrelevant matters. The way the refusal was reached breached his natural and constitutional rights to justice and fair procedures, he claims.

This week Ms Justice Niamh Hyland allowed the case to be brought against the chief superintendent and the Garda Commissioner. She was persuaded the man, represented by Eoghan Cole SC, had met the “arguable” legal grounds threshold for pursuing the claim.

Only the man was represented in court when she granted leave and adjourned the case to mid-April.