Taxi Driver Online

Glasgow taxi driver wanted '£30 up front' for £15 fare

Glasgow licensing chiefs have decided not to take action over complaints about two private hire drivers and a taxi driver.

Enforcement officers carried out investigations after allegations were made about Aleem Ahmed Alvi, Mohammad Imran and Mohammed Saleem.

Another taxi driver and a member of the public had accused Mr Imran of demanding £30 up front for a journey which cost just over £16. It was alleged Mr Saleem had attempted to refuse to allow a man with a guide dog into his car, while enforcement officers were told Mr Alvi had picked passengers up off the street, which private hire drivers aren’t allowed to do.

At hearings on Wednesday, councillors on the city’s licensing committee decided to take no action over the claims after hearing from the drivers.

Mr Imran was the subject of a complaint in May after another taxi driver reported he had told a “young lad” that he “wanted £30 up front” for a fare of “around £15”.

The customer told enforcement officers that he was trying to get home from a night out, only had £15 in his wallet and his phone was out of charge.

He had claimed the driver told him it would be £30 but the other driver described the price as “shocking” and took him home for £15.

Mr Imran said the man had asked how much the taxi would be, and he had told him around £16.50. He claimed, while they were discussing the price, the other taxi driver, who was further down the rank, had approached and said: “We were all idiots and you people should not have a licence.”

He told officers that there had been a “previous incident” with the other driver, who, it was claimed, had pressured him to move his car off a taxi rank in an “aggressive manner”. Mr Imran added he had been driving taxis since 2010 without getting into any trouble.

Cllr Alex Wilson, who chairs the committee, said the other driver “shouldn’t have interfered with your hire”, but Mr Imran could have dealt with the situation better.

The complaint about Mr Saleem alleged he had attempted to refuse a passenger with a guide dog, and claimed he had an exemption certificate.

At the hearing, the private hire driver admitted he didn’t have an exemption, but claimed he never said he did. He told councillors he had an allergy and hadn’t initially noticed it was a guide dog.

Mr Saleem also claimed the passenger, as he was dropped off, had shook dog hairs off his jacket into the car. He said the cost of having the car valeted was £20 while the fare had been £22.

Cllr Wilson was shown photos of the car after the passenger left and said he had “never seen” a vehicle “covered that badly in dog hair”.

An enforcement officer said a complaint had been made against Mr Alvi in May. It was claimed he had been ‘plying for trade’, by picking two girls up off the street, and had also not conducted himself in a “proper manner”.

The unit had not been able to corroborate the report and the driver said he had no recollection of the passengers. He said he did not know why the complaint had been made and he had only picked up Uber passengers.

_________________
IDFIMH

And, why, precisely, did this ever end up before the licensing committee?

As for the fare dispute, not enough information to assess what happened, precisely. I mean, did he actually quote more than clock, or was it even in-area? It obviously wasn't just round the corner, so might have been out-of-area, therefore...

And the only concrete information regards wrongdoing looks to me like the other driver actually ended up touting the fare

our council enforcement team always made it clear that they would never consider any complaint made by one driver vs another so i'm surprised these did

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