Taxi Driver Online

Another driver 'bumped', and another one involving drugs

Sounds more like a robbery to me than some sort of fraud, but maybe the circumstances don't meet the legal definition of robbery. Deffo one for the legal eagles, but certainly a bit different from the normal runner or robbery.


Bradford man is sentenced for defrauding taxi driver

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... xi-driver/

A TAXI driver transferred £200 into a man’s bank account in a fraud committed by three passengers, Bradford Crown Court heard.

Rizwan Khaliq, 43, of Silverhill Drive, Bradford Moor, Bradford, was sentenced for his role in the fraud that took place on the evening of March 4 last year.

The court heard that the scam unfolded when another man was picked up by the taxi driver in Halifax and taken to Leeds Road in Bradford.

Two more male passengers, including Khaliq, then got into the vehicle.

It was said that the men appeared to fall out over a debt and a knife was produced.

They then demanded money from the driver and he transferred £200 into a bank account belonging to one of them.

All three men were later seen exchanging money in a takeaway.

Khaliq pleaded guilty to defrauding the taxi driver.

His barrister Kristina Goodwin said he had spent time in custody before being granted bail on a curfew.

A father-of-three, he was working in the building trade and had sought help with his substance misuse.

Deputy Circuit Judge Peter Armstrong sentenced Khaliq to a 12-month community order with 15 rehabilitation activity days and a nine-month drug rehabilitation order.

He was ordered to pay £200 compensation to the taxi driver.

It does sound like robbery.

Maybe the driver didn't want to attend court or simply didn't turn up.

The biggest clue to me for that scenario is the sentence.

I suspect that's the lowest sentence that the judge has ever given. In short, that's a Magistrates Court sentence.

_________________
IDFIMH

Maybe it was considered that the driver wasn't threatened with the knife - the brief narrative in the article is a bit uncertain in that regard. It sounds like the knife was 'produced' because of the argument between the passengers, and then they 'demanded' money from the driver.

It's certainly less direct than saying they 'presented' the knife to the driver, say.



Anyway, I wonder what the fall out over the debt might have been about:

Maybe this article from 12 years ago provides a clue


Bradford Moor brothers Imran and Rizwan Khaliq told to pay £40,000

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... pay-40000/

Two criminal brothers who profited from their parts in a drug dealing and money laundering operation have been stripped of more than £40,000 of their ill-gotten gains.

Along with their father Abdul, Imran Khaliq, 32, and his brother Rizwan Khaliq, 30, ran the enterprise from their home in Silverhill Drive, Bradford Moor, for four years, Bradford Crown Court was told when they were sentenced in January.

In a police raid in 2008, drugs were found at the house along with £43,000 in cash which was heavily contaminated with heroin, the court heard.

Imran Khaliq admitted possessing the money and Rizwan Khaliq was said to have taken responsibility for the drugs.

The older brother, who was sentenced to three years and ten months for money laundering offences and assault, was ordered to pay back more than £43,000 at a confiscation hearing at Bradford Crown Court.

Rizwan Khaliq was found to have illegally benefited from more than £4,000.

He is serving four years and five months in prison for money laundering and drugs related offences.

Investigating officer Ian Broadbent, of the Bradford South Proceeds of Crime Team, said: “Taking away a criminal’s ill-gotten gains sends a clear message that crime does not pay and it demonstrates to the local public that procedures are in place to prevent criminals benefiting as a result of their criminal activity.

“One of the ways that criminals avoid having assets traced or confiscated is by hiding money through associates or family members. We want to know who these people are and how they are concealing their ill gotten gains.

“I can guarantee you we will investigate, we will be knocking on doors and we will be taking action.

“If their assets have been obtained unlawfully, they will be seized and ultimately used to the benefit of the local community.”

Anyone who thinks they know someone living beyond their means as a result of crime is asked to phone the Why Should They? campaign on (0800) 555 111. Abdul Khaliq, 52, whose last known address was given to the court in January as Sandford Road, Barkerend, will face a confiscation hearing at a later date.

He had been sentenced to three years in jail for being part of a conspiracy to launder money.