Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sun May 03, 2026 8:25 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18539
Don't usually get too picky about the terminology in press reports, but the chap here is referred to as a taxi driver twice, when he wasn't, and as a 'motorist', which I suppose isn't inaccurate, but it's a strange way to put it.

Anyway, unusual for an unlicensed driver to be driving a plated HC *and* done for overcharging?


Taxi driver fined for flouting licensing laws

https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/ ... sing-laws/

DRIVING a taxi without the appropriate licence and overcharging on a fare has cost a motorist more than £1,500.

Durham County Council took enforcement action against William Teasdale Thompson, of St David’s Close, Spennymoor, County Durham, after receiving a complaint from a member of the public.

The woman had booked a taxi to take her from a supermarket in Spennymoor town centre to her home, about half a mile away.

She alleged the driver charged her £5.60 for the fare and took the £1 coin when returning her trolley.

Following the complaint, the council’s licensing team contacted the taxi firm the woman had booked the taxi through and was told the fare had been undertaken by Thompson, who is related to the company’s owner.

Further checks revealed the 70-year-old did not hold a hackney carriage or private hire drivers’ licence.

Thompson failed to attend the hearing at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates’ Court and the case was heard in his absence.

Magistrates heard that when interviewed by council officers, Thompson said he had visited the home of the taxi company owner in a personal capacity.

While at the home, Thompson’s partner asked him to make a trip to the doctors and he was offered the use of the Hackney carriage vehicle.

Thompson, a former taxi driver, was asked if he would mind carrying out a short fare while using the vehicle.

He told officers that he had not intended to charge for the journey but when the passenger asked how much the fare would be, he asked what she would normally pay.

Thompson said he had helped the woman with her shopping bags when they arrived at her home and on return to the vehicle, found approximately £5 had been left in the central console.

The taxi driver was found guilty of driving a Hackney carriage vehicle without a Hackney carriage drivers’ licence, overcharging on a fare and driving without insurance.

He received a £1,100 fine and was ordered to pay costs of £419.20 and a £66 victim surcharge.

Joanne Waller, head of community protection at Durham County Council, said: “Taxi licensing is in place for the protection of the public as it ensures that all licensed drivers and private hire operators are fit and proper to hold a licence.

“This prosecution proves that we will take action against those who flout the law and that the consequences of doing so can be serious, both financially and reputationally.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18539
Quote:
Magistrates heard that when interviewed by council officers, Thompson said he had visited the home of the taxi company owner in a personal capacity.

While at the home, Thompson’s partner asked him to make a trip to the doctors and he was offered the use of the Hackney carriage vehicle.

Thompson, a former taxi driver, was asked if he would mind carrying out a short fare while using the vehicle.

Naughty, naughty proprietor - wonder if action taken against him?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20863
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
as a hackney proprietor he wouldn't need an ops license so the only action that could be taken would be for allowing an uninsured driver to drive on his insurance

6 penalty points and a fine I believe

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 18539
edders23 wrote:
as a hackney proprietor he wouldn't need an ops license so the only action that could be taken would be for allowing an uninsured driver to drive on his insurance

But action could be take against him as the plateholder for letting an unlicensed driver use his HC?

And would hardly be a surprise if as a 'taxi company owner' the person is also licensed as a PH operator - suspect there's mixed fleets in that neck of the woods.

Also not beyond the realms of possibility that the 'taxi company owner' was managing the HC on behalf of a third party proprietor, so could be running an HC circuit and therefore may not require any kind of licence? :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 07, 2020 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:47 pm
Posts: 20863
Location: Stamford Britains prettiest town till SKDC ruined it
we had a proprietor here about 25 years ago allowed a driver to start working before their badge application had gone through

They were caught :shock: and refused a badge fined and penalty points for no insurance and the proprietor also fined and given 6 penalty points but don't think the council even considered suspending the plate

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 820 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