Taxi Driver Online

Taxi driver fined over illegal touting

A PRIVATE hire taxi driver was fined £700 after illegally picking two plain clothed police officers. Nawid Amiri, of Lincoln Road, Peterborough, failed to attend the hearing at Peterborough Magistrates’ Court on May 5, where he was fined £350 for unlawfully plying for hire and a further £350 for having no insurance.

He was also given eight penalty points on his licence for having no insurance and ordered to pay £70 in costs and a £15 victim surcharge. A decision has yet to be made by Peterborough City Council about whether Amiri’s private hire badge should be revoked.

The court heard he was caught in a joint operation carried out by the council’s licensing enforcement team and Cambridgeshire Police in December. Two plain clothed police officers targeted private hire vehicles to establish if any of the drivers would pick up customers without a booking.

If passengers are picked up by a private hire car without a pre-booking, the driver’s insurance is usually invalidated. Amiri was approached by the officers in the city centre, who asked him to take them to Orton Waterville. On reaching the destination they identified themselves and were met at the location by the council’s licensing enforcement team.

Ian Robinson, the council’s licensing enforcement officer, said: “The law makes a clear distinction between a hackney carriage that can be hailed in the street and private hire cars that must be pre-booked. “These joint operations attempt to prevent drivers acting unlawfully and assist in educating the trade and public of the dangers of unlawfully plying for hire.”

The hearing comes after illegal touting of private hire vehicles was made a city centre policing priority in March amid claims there are more than 1,000 “uninsured” taxi fares being taken every weekend in the city centre.

_________________
IDFIMH

I'm still not sure, and a little confused, about this having no insurance lark.
If I insure a vehicle (any type) for 'hire and reward' and then use it for the purpose of picking people up and being rewarded for it then I'm insured !

Forget about being licensed to do so or any other legalities, I'm specifically talking about the insurance part. As long as you have 'hire or reward' insurance you're insured, surely ? All this illegal plying for hire, touting, PH taking flagdowns, unlicensed vehicles etc. doesn't make a difference as far as insurance goes. Does it ? How can it ? Why ?

You've taken out the appropriate insurance, told the insurance company what the vehicle is going to be used for, paid for it, have the certificate and are using the vehicle in accordance with what the insurance says - so how can you not be insured ?

There is a world of difference between Public hire and reward and Pre booked private hire...at the very least in the cost of these different policies, and at the most the view taken by Police that the driver is not properly insured and then prosecuted.

Has the PH told his insurer he's going to ignore the law and the terms of his licence by using his PH as an unlicensed hack?

You've actually answered your own question here.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Isn't it the case that a fundamental breach of the licensing rules means you're not insured?

Most insurance companies don't insure PH for public hirings, and I suspect that was the case here.

Confusion arises over the issue of customers, and if they are insured if the PH (or in some cases taxi) picked them illegally. They are always covered no matter what level of insurance the driver/owner has.

_________________
IDFIMH

That's my point. If you approach an insurance company and ask them to insure a vehicle - be it PH, hackney or a tractor, and tell them you want for 'hire and reward' and they issue an insurance certificate then you are insured to use that vehicle for that purpose !

If you then decide to use a PH for illegal pickups how does that invalidate the insurance ? You're using it for the purpose that you told the insurance company ie 'hire and reward'.

Fair enough other laws are broken, but I'm focusing specifically on the insurance part. The contract is between you and the insurance company, has the correct insurance been taken out, yes, hire and reward. Was the vehicle being used in accordance with the insurance, yes, for hire and reward. The issue is whether or not the insurance company thinks you're insured - not the police or LA.

If the policy states that PH are only covered when doing pre-booked jobs then fair enough, but if it doesn't.....

A PH vehicle is not licenced to take unbooked hires, neither is a PH driver.
Most policies require the vehicle and it's driver to be licenced for all activities they undertake, should a licence be required.
If the activity is not covered by the appropriate licences - hack vehicle and hack driver - the insurance is invalid.

Perhaps someone could point us to the correct case law?

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

No.

Insurance companies will cover you in the same way they cover drivers that may have caused an accident through speeding.

_________________
IDFIMH

Most Peterbotough PH get up to these tricks or farejacking but the authorities aren't bothered about that because it is one taxi firm ripping off another. When the summer balls are on at the Haycock there is a constant stream of them turning up there we usually lose 50% of all our booked fares HOWEVER in most cases once the driver has had his badge taken off him they move to another district and get a badge there which is why we have ended up with so many rogues in Stamford

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

I guess it's down to the small print then.
I wonder if it applies to ALL policies ? Whenever I've taken out insurance I've told the company I want hire and reward in addition to SDP, I can't recall them ever asking if the vehicle was going to be used as a taxi/PH, so in effect any vehicle, licensed or not, can be insured for hire and reward. Nor do I remember any mention that the vehicle should be used in accordance with any licence.

So if you have hire and reward insurance, and no-where in the policy small print does it state that the vehicle must be used in accordance with applicable licenses or laws, in other words if it DOESN'T say you can't pick up unbooked fares you'd still be covered ?

Don't know about you but every insurance company/broker i've used in the last 15 years (and there have been quite a few) have always asked for a copy of the vehicle licence and the licences (taxi/PH and DVLA) of all named drivers.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

Strange, I've never been asked. All my insurance has been done through a local broker and they know the vehicle is going to be used as a cab but have never asked for any documentation when taking out the policy.

Only time I've had to provide licenses was after I submitted a claim (not at fault !) and that paid out no problem.

I've had a quick look at my current policy and cannot find any clause that says the vehicle must be used in accordance with licensing regulations, therefore my argument remains valid...

So if I was to get stopped after picking up a non-booked job, and plod try to do me for having no insurance, I can show them the policy and ask where it says I am not. It doesn't. As far as I can see I am insured for hire and reward - regardless of whether that job is pre-booked or not.

Believe what you like, I find it difficult to believe any insurance will cover an illegal act.

_________________

http://wingsoverscotland.com/ http://www.newsnetscotland.com/

At the end of the day, your insurance company want your money. If you have ommited to tell them that you are not licensed for the service that you provide, they will not pay you out and you will not get a refund.

_________________
Grandad,