|
Taxi driver stripped of his licence after hit-and-run allegation
A taxi driver had his private hire licence taken away following accusations of hit and run, driving at police, littering and intimidation.
The taxi driver said he was asleep at home when accused of hitting a woman’s vehicle and leaving the scene. Then he changed his account, saying he was driving and “it wasn’t anyone else”, but he denied the collision or that witnesses tried to stop him driving away, despite CCTV evidence, and said wheel arch scratches were from reversing off his drive.
He later said he had been lying and “waffling” to cover up for his son who was really driving his car without his knowledge while he was in bed on April 2. The driver made an “error of judgment” trying to protect his son, his solicitor Simon Walker told councillors on Stockton Council’s licensing committee.
In a second complaint, the unnamed driver was accused of littering – throwing air fresheners from his car – and behaving in an intimidating way to a member of the public who confronted him as she drove home with her child. He denied this, saying the air fresheners “flew out of the open window” as he tried to take them off his rear-view mirror because they affected his hay fever.
He also denied being aggressive, say minutes of a licensing committee meeting where the case was heard. The member of the public said she felt worried he would seek retribution as he knew where she lived, and was anxious when she heard an engine running outside her home.
This member of the public gave evidence, saying she asked the taxi driver if he would pick the rubbish up, he replied no then followed her home and reversed his car until he was outside her house. She said she noted his badge number and he responded by taking a photo of her home and car, “saying I have your number too”.
Mr Walker said the taxi driver accepted the air fresheners “left his vehicle through the window” but this was not intentional. He said he did not pick them up but returned to the spot later and found they were not there.
The taxi driver admitted he was angry because “he thought that the witness was following him”, but could not explain why he took a photograph of her house and said he had since deleted it. He said he now appreciated his behaviour was intimidating and distressing, did not intend to make her feel that way and he apologised directly.
The final complaint concerned CCTV “showing a private hire vehicle involved in facilitating drug dealing”. According to Cleveland Police officers, the car was “driven towards the police car at speed and then on to a footpath to get away” when confronted in the early hours of May 15.
The taxi driver’s car was identified and his taxi licence suspended the next day. He confirmed was the sole driver of the vehicle, but told police his son – who did not have a full licence and was learning to drive – was behind the wheel at the time, claiming to be taking it to McDonald’s. He said he now took his keys upstairs to stop it happening again.
Mr Walker said the driver had picked up thousands of customers in his long career without cause for concern and found his suspension difficult financially. He urged the committee to give him a chance to prove he was a “fit and proper person”.
The committee heard of his taxi licence history, including a suspension because of a fraud prosecution in 2004, advice over his attitude and overcharging and written warnings for using a phone while driving, not wearing a seatbelt, failing to declare a motoring conviction and a shoplifting conviction revealed in a DBS check between 2007 and 2014.
His licence was revoked in 2020 as he was medically unfit due to a health episode, and he regained a combined licence in 2023. He was arrested, put into a police van and his car searched in January 2024, but he said he was cleared at the scene over an armed robbery at a bookmakers’.
The committee did not believe his version of events in the first complaint, finding he “appeared insincere and disingenuous” and gave “dubious explanations” under questioning. They were concerned about his ability to keep his car secure and his “lack of oversight of his son’s unlawful use” of the vehicle twice in six weeks.
And they were “alarmed” at his “intimidating and distressing behaviour” towards a “credible and honest witness”, becoming angry and over-reacting. They did not find his responses credible, nor his apology genuine.
They found a “pattern of concerns” over his attitude and breaking the rules, with at least six warnings and advice given during his career. They unanimously decided he was not a fit and proper person and revoked his hackney carriage and private hire driver’s licence.
_________________
IDFIMH
|
Login
Register
FAQ
