Taxi Driver Online

Bristol Post seems to have gone to town slightly over one PHD comitting one plying for hire offence. But some interesting stuff in the article. And if my thread title doesn't make sense, all will become clear...


Cabbie banned for two months after undercover police operation

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... er-5670526

Off-duty private hire driver took two women who turned out to be female PCSOs


Bristol Temple Meads station (Image: Jon Kent/Bristol Live)

A private hire driver has been banned for two months after illegally taking undercover police to Bristol Temple Meads while he was off-duty.

The cabbie was in his car having just clocked off, and was not displaying the required ID badge or licence plate, when the pair of police community support officers (PCSOs) asked for a lift, a private council meeting heard.

He told them to try the taxi rank but the two women said none were there and that they would miss their train, so he agreed to take them for £7, the hearing was told.

The cabbie was pulled over by police and admitted unlawfully plying for hire, which is allowed only in hackney carriages, not private hire vehicles, which must be pre-booked.

He was issued with a £300 spot fine and six penalty points before being summoned to a closed session of Bristol City Council’s public safety and protection sub-committee.

Councillors suspended his private hire driver’s licence for two months instead of the usual six under the local authority’s policy after hearing he had a clean record and had received no complaints since becoming a taxi driver in 1995.

The details have been revealed in the recently published minutes of the meeting at City Hall on June 8.

They say the driver, referred to as AK, who holds a licence for both private hire and a hackney carriage, was the subject of an undercover test purchase operation on March 13.

The minutes say: “AK said he thought it was unfair for the undercover PCSOs to insist on hire when he had already referred them to a taxi rank.

“He thought he was helping someone who was in danger of missing a train but admitted he should not have charged them if this was a genuine act of charity.

“While AK has insurance cover generally, it was invalidated for that trip due to him plying for hire, which is a breach of the conditions.

“AK said he did not display his ID badge at the time as he took it off as he was about to clock off due to a lack of business.

“Regarding his vehicle plates, AK said that he had a faulty holder, so the plate kept falling out. He has a new holder now so that issue is fixed.”

The minutes say officers recommended a written warning or suspension.

“The committee was satisfied that the undercover officers had not acted as agents provocateur because Mr K had not been threatened, incited, overborne upon or pressurised into committing the offence,” they say.

“The officers had acted no differently to an ordinary member of the public and Mr K could have refused to transport them.

“The council takes a dim view of plying for hire because not only does it deprive properly licensed hackney carriage drivers of their legitimate trade but it also places the public at risk because plying for hire will normally mean that the insurance will be invalidated in respect of that particular use of the vehicle.

“Usually, the council’s policy starting point would be to impose a period of suspension of six months.

“However, given that Mr K put forward strong mitigation and was very remorseful, the committee decided that there were exceptional reasons for them to depart from council policy and impose a shorter period of suspension of two months of the private hire driver’s licence but to leave the hackney carriage driver’s licence intact, since hackney carriage drivers are permitted to ply for hire.”

The minutes say the cabbie primarily works as a private hire driver as he had to sell his hackney carriage vehicle due to poor health and financial difficulties.

“He now hires a vehicle for work and two licences means he can be more flexible in what vehicle he drives,” they add.

I suppose it's entrapment they're talking about here, although the e-word isn't actually used


So he's not fit and proper now with regard to something that happened four months ago, but will be fit and proper in a couple of months.

But while's he's not fit and proper to drive a PHV in the meantime, he's still fit and proper to drive an HC.



New one on me - anyone else heard of anything similar?

If the above is true that's getting very near to a case of entrapment.

_________________
IDFIMH

When it comes to decisions made at a licensing committee, nothing ever surprises me.

_________________
IDFIMH