Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Thu Apr 30, 2026 8:43 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 2:01 pm
Posts: 18
Location: Sunderland
Hey, I hope all the smackheads and drug users never read this but we are sick and tired of them. We decided enough was enough so we thought every single time it happened.... get the police involved, we know that can be time consuming but it has to stop somewhere. What a waste of time, we are now informed by the Police that it is not thier problem, take out a civil case against the tw*ts they say, they are not our debt collectors they say. OK, I can understand the last part BUT now the word is spreading that the the police WILL NOT take action.. ever. It will get to epidemic proportions if the lazy, dole boozing morons manage to string more than 2 words together and tell the other zombies. We are now asking for payment first on over 20% of our journeys, and the public dont like it, most are genuine but how do you know. We flag the addresses and bar it but sometimes even they are cleverer than us and use different mobiles/addresses !!! Apart from dropping them all in the Wear and keeping thier heads down, what can we do? Any ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 9:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:08 pm
Posts: 244
Make an official complaint to the police, you are a tax payer and therefor legally entitled to police protection, which includes people making off without payment, can you imagine ASDA shoplifters getting the same none police response?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
FRAUD ACT 2006 - “doing a runner”:
Making off without payment, or bilking, is now caught by the Fraud Act 2006 Sections 2 and 11 are relevant, however, charges are most easily laid under section 11:
Section 11 “Obtaining services dishonestly” This reads as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for
himself or another—
(a) by a dishonest act, and
(b) in breach of subsection (2).
(2) A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a) they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or
will be made for or in respect of them,
(b) he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in
respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c) when he obtains them, he knows—
(i) that they are being made available on the basis described in
paragraph (a), or
(ii) that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12
months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
5 years or to a fine (or to both).
(4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12months were a reference to 6 months.
CPS guidelines on the above:
The elements of the offence are that the Defendant: obtains for himself or another services

dishonestly knowing the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part.
This offence replaces obtaining services by deception in the Theft Act 1978 which is partly repealed by the Act.
In many cases, the Defendant will also have committed an offence under Section 2 of the Act (Fraud by making a false representation - that payment will be made or made in full). Prosecutors must decide which offence better reflects the criminality involved. The maximum sentence for the Section 11 offence is five years imprisonment.
a) “Obtains for himself or another”:
Section 11 differs from the offences under the Theft Act in that it requires the actual obtaining of a service (by a dishonest act e. g. non payment).
It is not possible to commit the offence by omission of the service alone. This avoids the situation where unscrupulous service providers might feel able to pressure anyone who had been given services they had not requested.
b) “Services”
Services will have the same definition as in Section 1 of the 1978 Theft Act (Archbold 2007, para. 21-3411). The service must be provided on the basis that it will be paid for.
c) “Dishonestly”:
The Ghosh test will apply, see below.
d) “Knowing” :
the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and
e) “Avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part,” see below:
Under the Fraud Act the Defendant must intend to avoid payment for the service provided (in full or in part). He must have that intention at the time he 'avoids'.
The “Gosh” test of dishonesty:
1 This is the standard practitioners work on crime, available at any decent public librar

R v Ghosh, (1982) CA
D a surgeon was filling in as a consultant at a hospital. He pretended that he had himself carried out surgical operations and that money was due to him. The operations had, in fact, been carried out under the NHS by someone else.
Held: In determining whether D was acting dishonestly, the jury had first to decide whether what was done was dishonest. If it was, the jury must then consider whether D himself must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest by the standards of the ordinary reasonable person.
Payment due?:
R v Aziz [1993] Crim LR 708
[Making off without payment - 'the spot' where payment should be made]
D requested a taxi driver to take him to a club 13 miles away. On arrival D refused to pay the £15 fare claiming that the journey was only four miles. The taxi driver at first started to take them back to their hotel, then took them to the police station where he ran out of the taxi.
Held: The Theft Act 1978 did not require payment be made on any particular spot. 'On the spot' related to the knowledge that the customer had as to when payment should be made. In the case of a taxi, payment may be made whilst sitting in the car or standing at the window but the fares were requested when the customer was still in the car. The obligation to pay continued even when being taken back to the starting point / police station. 'On the spot' was not necessarily the final destination of the journey:
Guilty
NOTE The Fraud Act does not repeal s.3 of the Theft Act; it is still available
Actions a driver could take:
Phone the police.
You can take the offender to the police station, but you must be aware that you are making a citizen's arrest.
You need to be clear on the offence you are arresting for and tell the offender you are taking this action.
You have the right to arrest as the offence is an “arrestable offence”.

You can use reasonable force. Broadly that means you can only use force if the offender is resisting, and can only use sufficient force to apprehend. This is complicated and subjective.
If force has to be used you are advised not to do so. You run the risk of injury to yourself and damage to your vehicle. If you injure the passenger you could be charged, you have to account for the force used. As the offence is not a very “serious” one , it is not worth using 'reasonable force' better to let the offender go and report the matter.

This might help... this was put together by a friend of mine and presented to Sefton Council and Merseyside police... and was accepted..... his name is Richard Jarman

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Thu Sep 22, 2011 9:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 12:27 pm
Posts: 222
Location: Dundee cabbie for many a year
Easy solution ask for an advance payment up front, if they refuse, then refuse travel, that's what happens in Dundee!!
#-o #-o

_________________
Watch out curiosity killed the cat


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:19 am
Posts: 233
The best piece of advice I was given at the start of my driving a cab was.....if in doubt as to whether the
customer will pay....ask for ''payment up front''....if you dont get the money you never will !...

Once i had a journey worth £20....asked for the money and was offered £10 as a half way ...saying I will trust you half and you trust me half....my response was...''are we going half the way or the whole way ?....needless to say he got out
of the cab...they must think we are stupid...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57349
Location: 1066 Country
cheshirebest wrote:
they must think we are stupid...

Problem is too many are. :sad:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 7:25 pm
Posts: 37494
Location: Wayneistan
MR T wrote:
FRAUD ACT 2006 - “doing a runner”:
Making off without payment, or bilking, is now caught by the Fraud Act 2006 Sections 2 and 11 are relevant, however, charges are most easily laid under section 11:
Section 11 “Obtaining services dishonestly” This reads as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for
himself or another—
(a) by a dishonest act, and
(b) in breach of subsection (2).
(2) A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a) they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or
will be made for or in respect of them,
(b) he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in
respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c) when he obtains them, he knows—
(i) that they are being made available on the basis described in
paragraph (a), or
(ii) that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12
months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
5 years or to a fine (or to both).
(4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12months were a reference to 6 months.
CPS guidelines on the above:
The elements of the offence are that the Defendant: obtains for himself or another services

dishonestly knowing the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part.
This offence replaces obtaining services by deception in the Theft Act 1978 which is partly repealed by the Act.
In many cases, the Defendant will also have committed an offence under Section 2 of the Act (Fraud by making a false representation - that payment will be made or made in full). Prosecutors must decide which offence better reflects the criminality involved. The maximum sentence for the Section 11 offence is five years imprisonment.
a) “Obtains for himself or another”:
Section 11 differs from the offences under the Theft Act in that it requires the actual obtaining of a service (by a dishonest act e. g. non payment).
It is not possible to commit the offence by omission of the service alone. This avoids the situation where unscrupulous service providers might feel able to pressure anyone who had been given services they had not requested.
b) “Services”
Services will have the same definition as in Section 1 of the 1978 Theft Act (Archbold 2007, para. 21-3411). The service must be provided on the basis that it will be paid for.
c) “Dishonestly”:
The Ghosh test will apply, see below.
d) “Knowing” :
the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and
e) “Avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part,” see below:
Under the Fraud Act the Defendant must intend to avoid payment for the service provided (in full or in part). He must have that intention at the time he 'avoids'.
The “Gosh” test of dishonesty:
1 This is the standard practitioners work on crime, available at any decent public librar

R v Ghosh, (1982) CA
D a surgeon was filling in as a consultant at a hospital. He pretended that he had himself carried out surgical operations and that money was due to him. The operations had, in fact, been carried out under the NHS by someone else.
Held: In determining whether D was acting dishonestly, the jury had first to decide whether what was done was dishonest. If it was, the jury must then consider whether D himself must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest by the standards of the ordinary reasonable person.
Payment due?:
R v Aziz [1993] Crim LR 708
[Making off without payment - 'the spot' where payment should be made]
D requested a taxi driver to take him to a club 13 miles away. On arrival D refused to pay the £15 fare claiming that the journey was only four miles. The taxi driver at first started to take them back to their hotel, then took them to the police station where he ran out of the taxi.
Held: The Theft Act 1978 did not require payment be made on any particular spot. 'On the spot' related to the knowledge that the customer had as to when payment should be made. In the case of a taxi, payment may be made whilst sitting in the car or standing at the window but the fares were requested when the customer was still in the car. The obligation to pay continued even when being taken back to the starting point / police station. 'On the spot' was not necessarily the final destination of the journey:
Guilty
NOTE The Fraud Act does not repeal s.3 of the Theft Act; it is still available
Actions a driver could take:
Phone the police.
You can take the offender to the police station, but you must be aware that you are making a citizen's arrest.
You need to be clear on the offence you are arresting for and tell the offender you are taking this action.
You have the right to arrest as the offence is an “arrestable offence”.

You can use reasonable force. Broadly that means you can only use force if the offender is resisting, and can only use sufficient force to apprehend. This is complicated and subjective.
If force has to be used you are advised not to do so. You run the risk of injury to yourself and damage to your vehicle. If you injure the passenger you could be charged, you have to account for the force used. As the offence is not a very “serious” one , it is not worth using 'reasonable force' better to let the offender go and report the matter.

This might help... this was put together by a friend of mine and presented to Sefton Council and Merseyside police... and was accepted..... his name is Richard Jarman


Yeah,,,,he got a tad p*ssed about that and ranted about it.......its now off a certain website so no f*cker can benefit......but likewise with an email list.....where he aint emailed anymore :D

CC

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 12:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8529
captain cab wrote:
MR T wrote:
FRAUD ACT 2006 - “doing a runner”:
Making off without payment, or bilking, is now caught by the Fraud Act 2006 Sections 2 and 11 are relevant, however, charges are most easily laid under section 11:
Section 11 “Obtaining services dishonestly” This reads as follows:
(1) A person is guilty of an offence under this section if he obtains services for
himself or another—
(a) by a dishonest act, and
(b) in breach of subsection (2).
(2) A person obtains services in breach of this subsection if—
(a) they are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or
will be made for or in respect of them,
(b) he obtains them without any payment having been made for or in
respect of them or without payment having been made in full, and
(c) when he obtains them, he knows—
(i) that they are being made available on the basis described in
paragraph (a), or
(ii) that they might be, but intends that payment will not be made, or will not be made in full.
(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12
months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
5 years or to a fine (or to both).
(4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12months were a reference to 6 months.
CPS guidelines on the above:
The elements of the offence are that the Defendant: obtains for himself or another services

dishonestly knowing the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part.
This offence replaces obtaining services by deception in the Theft Act 1978 which is partly repealed by the Act.
In many cases, the Defendant will also have committed an offence under Section 2 of the Act (Fraud by making a false representation - that payment will be made or made in full). Prosecutors must decide which offence better reflects the criminality involved. The maximum sentence for the Section 11 offence is five years imprisonment.
a) “Obtains for himself or another”:
Section 11 differs from the offences under the Theft Act in that it requires the actual obtaining of a service (by a dishonest act e. g. non payment).
It is not possible to commit the offence by omission of the service alone. This avoids the situation where unscrupulous service providers might feel able to pressure anyone who had been given services they had not requested.
b) “Services”
Services will have the same definition as in Section 1 of the 1978 Theft Act (Archbold 2007, para. 21-3411). The service must be provided on the basis that it will be paid for.
c) “Dishonestly”:
The Ghosh test will apply, see below.
d) “Knowing” :
the services are made available on the basis that payment has been, is being or will be made for or in respect of them or that they might be and
e) “Avoids or intends to avoid payment in full or in part,” see below:
Under the Fraud Act the Defendant must intend to avoid payment for the service provided (in full or in part). He must have that intention at the time he 'avoids'.
The “Gosh” test of dishonesty:
1 This is the standard practitioners work on crime, available at any decent public librar

R v Ghosh, (1982) CA
D a surgeon was filling in as a consultant at a hospital. He pretended that he had himself carried out surgical operations and that money was due to him. The operations had, in fact, been carried out under the NHS by someone else.
Held: In determining whether D was acting dishonestly, the jury had first to decide whether what was done was dishonest. If it was, the jury must then consider whether D himself must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest by the standards of the ordinary reasonable person.
Payment due?:
R v Aziz [1993] Crim LR 708
[Making off without payment - 'the spot' where payment should be made]
D requested a taxi driver to take him to a club 13 miles away. On arrival D refused to pay the £15 fare claiming that the journey was only four miles. The taxi driver at first started to take them back to their hotel, then took them to the police station where he ran out of the taxi.
Held: The Theft Act 1978 did not require payment be made on any particular spot. 'On the spot' related to the knowledge that the customer had as to when payment should be made. In the case of a taxi, payment may be made whilst sitting in the car or standing at the window but the fares were requested when the customer was still in the car. The obligation to pay continued even when being taken back to the starting point / police station. 'On the spot' was not necessarily the final destination of the journey:
Guilty
NOTE The Fraud Act does not repeal s.3 of the Theft Act; it is still available
Actions a driver could take:
Phone the police.
You can take the offender to the police station, but you must be aware that you are making a citizen's arrest.
You need to be clear on the offence you are arresting for and tell the offender you are taking this action.
You have the right to arrest as the offence is an “arrestable offence”.

You can use reasonable force. Broadly that means you can only use force if the offender is resisting, and can only use sufficient force to apprehend. This is complicated and subjective.
If force has to be used you are advised not to do so. You run the risk of injury to yourself and damage to your vehicle. If you injure the passenger you could be charged, you have to account for the force used. As the offence is not a very “serious” one , it is not worth using 'reasonable force' better to let the offender go and report the matter.

This might help... this was put together by a friend of mine and presented to Sefton Council and Merseyside police... and was accepted..... his name is Richard Jarman


Yeah,,,,he got a tad p*ssed about that and ranted about it.......its now off a certain website so no f*cker can benefit......but likewise with an email list.....where he aint emailed anymore :D

CC

Now this is where I have to be diplomatic. my understanding is that somebody else put their name to his work

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2011 2:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:00 am
Posts: 33
According to above, it seems an irefutable fact, that it is a crime to 'not pay for services obtained'.

So, if the police are not wanting to police... take measures yourself (just like shops do for prosecutions against shop-lifters).... they need to established goods were taken outside the shop and payment was not made.

to establish this in a taxi situation..... cctv would establish this. also it would offer id recognition of offender.... if a phone number or address was known, this may help in id or arrest.
... then report to police for processing (processing the evidence YOU have OBTAINED)

I have noticed that the police seem to be time restrained on 'policing'.... finding things out.... especially at low cost levels....
..... so cover this bit, then hand it to them for legal processing.

UNLESS
there is a minimum money value tor not being criminal... is there??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:45 am
Posts: 9966
Location: Braintree, Essex.
With runners it helps if the drivers can run to, instead of sitting there eating crap and looking like buddas get out and excersise, this way you might catch some runners.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 10591
Location: Scotland
There was a program on tonight at around 10 PM cannot remember what side, and about 5 mins into it a guy gets in to what looks like a diablo with a passenger bulk head, before the cab moves he has to touch something against the bulkhead glass that had pay here looked like one of those door entry fobs,
I think the program was a futuristic drama but it could be a sign of things to come


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 5:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:11 pm
Posts: 498
Location: Ayr
If we all took Cards. One could put the card in the Slot before the Journey started!

_________________
Don't dream it ~ Be it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 20130
skippy41 wrote:
There was a program on tonight at around 10 PM cannot remember what side, and about 5 mins into it a guy gets in to what looks like a diablo with a passenger bulk head, before the cab moves he has to touch something against the bulkhead glass that had pay here looked like one of those door entry fobs,
I think the program was a futuristic drama but it could be a sign of things to come

They had a thumbprint recognition system in a taxi, on a police computer and a door lock in Back to the Future part 2.

_________________
Grandad,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: RUNNERS-NON PAYERS
PostPosted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2011 5:00 am
Posts: 33
A passenger on route, asked what I do about runners...
I mentioned I usually leave the meter running then just jog along behind them for a little while.
8)
He paid.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users 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