Taxi Driver Online

Highland Council allows jailed rapist to keep taxi operator licence as red-faced local authority scrambles to undo botched decision

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... at-438802/

Highland Council is set to redo a decision allowing convicted rapist David Brown to keep his taxi operator licence despite him being jailed for almost seven years last month.

The extraordinary move came after a review request hearing came to the council’s licensing committee last Tuesday when it is understood that councillors voted behind-closed-doors by majority to allow Brown to keep the operator’s licence.

That also flew in the face of a Police Scotland objection to Brown retaining the licence.

To undo that decision, the council has been forced to effectively brand its own ruling in the matter as a potential “contravention of law” or “maladministration leading to injustice”.

It is understood that the item will be reconsidered by all councillors - and that those councillors who voted to continue Brown’s licence could face a vote of no confidence, with some thought to be considering their positions.

In December 2023, Brown (50) was convicted of raping a “vulnerable” 18-year-old female passenger in a remote lay-by between Dingwall and Strathpeffer.

He was accused of effectively “dumping” her in sub-zero temperatures and was sentenced to six years and nine months in prison and placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register for life for what the judge described as “a terrifying ordeal” for his victim who had been on a night out in Inverness.

Five weeks after his sentencing, the licencing committee said he could keep the operator’s licence which is linked to a vehicle.

His taxi driver’s licence was removed in January 2024, the month after the attack on the teenager.

The precise reason why Brown was allowed to retain his operator’s licence has not been made public, as a Highland Council spokeswoman explained: "We do not comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private.

“However, we can confirm that a Standing Order 16 Notice of Referral has been initiated by the chief officer - legal and corporate governance.

“The licensing committee decision will now be referred to a future meeting of the Highland Council for further consideration.”

It allows the council’s chief legal and governance officer Stewart Fraser to refer to the full council “any decision taken which they consider a contravention of law or any code of practice under any enactment, or maladministration leading to injustice”.

The move was announced at last week’s full council meeting by convener Bill Lobban – just two days after the licensing committee met – and means all councillors need to receive some legal training.

Cllr Lobban said: “I will liaise with the chief officer of legal and corporate governance to agree future steps, which will include delivery of training for all members, as licensing training will be required for all members.

“Myself, the leader of the council and the leader of the opposition support the decision of the chief officer of legal and corporate governance. This is for your information.”

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “We can confirm officers attended a Highland Council licensing committee meeting on Tuesday, June 23, and submitted an objection.

“The decision on whether to grant a licence is a matter for the council.”

_________________
IDFIMH

the blokes in jail ,so what use is the license anyway

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

I think it was a vehicle license.

_________________
IDFIMH

The essence to this thing is the badge/plate distinction, which isn't really brought out in the article, unless you're an insider, as opposed to a member of the public.

But I recall it from years ago in Dundee, when (apparently) a drunk driver was allowed to keep his plate, but not his badge. Which makes sense in a way. But to what extent that should extend to other crimes is obviously debatable.

But also fundamental to the Dundee thing is that plates were capped. So to that extent it was a bit like those people who kept Dundee plates while living abroad, for example. They needed to keep their plate because it has a value in terms of excessive rentals etc.

So it would probably be irrelevant to a drunk driver if plates were uncapped, because he probably wouldn't want to retain it anyway, because it would probably have no use to him.

Whether or not that's the case here in Inverness isn't clear. Maybe he has drivers on his car(s), or maybe he now intends to.

But for most in the trade, if they lose their badge then they won't want/need their plate anyway, so the distinction alluded to in the article regards revocation is irrelevant.

I know but are you suggesting he's going to turn his cell into a booking office ?

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

It's worth remembering that operators in Scotland are what we call proprietors in England.

Which is why I suspect the numpties got confused, as the vehicle is (I assume) fit and proper, but the owner isn't. And the owner won't be able to drive it where he currently resides.

Those councillors should have been better informed by legal, and if they were but still made that mad decision, then they should all resign.

_________________
IDFIMH

_________________
IDFIMH

Quite telling.

_________________
IDFIMH

Some interesting stuff in the actual article, and there's follow-up stuff, and looks like this will run and run


Revealed: The six male councillors who backed Inverness rapist keeping taxi licence… and the four women who opposed it

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... -revealed/

The decision is already being reviewed after Highland Council's top legal officer took the rare decision to refer it to all 74 councillors.

A rapist taxi driver from the Highlands has been allowed to keep his operator’s licence from prison.

David Brown, 50, of Croy near Inverness, was sentenced to six years and nine months in May for raping an 18-year-old female passenger in December 2023.

Members of Highland Council’s licensing committee have now decided to allow a taxi operator’s licence to remain in his name – despite an objection from Police Scotland.

Today The Press and Journal can reveal the divisive and controversial vote was split exclusively on gender lines – with the six men on the committee voting FOR Brown to keep his licence while the four women present voted AGAINST the move.

The item was discussed behind closed doors and the reason behind the decision has not been disclosed publicly.

However, The P&J understands all four women argued against granting the licence to a man who has been placed on the sex offender’s register for life on the grounds of public safety.

Councillors have told us they felt physically sick when they read a police report from senior officers urging them to refuse the application.

Meanwhile, we have been told those who backed the licence did not want to punish Brown’s wife for her husband’s crimes after hearing she needed the income from the taxi to provide for her family.

The vote has caused uproar with the council’s top legal officer taking the rare step to file documents to have the decision reviewed.

It means the 74 councillors who are not on the local authority’s licensing committee will now have to receive specialist legal training to make a decision at full council.

And just days after the vote a motion was lodged at last week’s full council urging all councillors to receive “training on misogyny”.

The Press and Journal has had an insight into what happened at the private meeting.

Brown raped teen before ‘dumping’ her in freezing weather

It is understood female members at the council are angry, with some arguing misogyny is very present in the local authority.

Brown’s taxi driver’s licence, which had permitted him to drive a taxi, was initially suspended by Highland Council’s licensing committee in January 2024.

That decision was taken just a month after he raped an 18-year-old female in a lonely lay-by between Strathpeffer and Dingwall.

She wanted to go back to her Highland home, but he drove past it before “dumping” her in Dingwall in freezing conditions.

Brown had maintained his innocence throughout the trial, insisting he had a consensual sexual encounter instigated by his victim.

He was sentenced in May this year following a trial.

During sentencing, Lord Renucci said: “When she got into your taxi that night, she was entitled to think you would perform the function you had been engaged to – that of delivering her safely to her own home, which was some distance away.

“Instead you drove on, past the area where she lived, and took her to Dingwall where, as we know from the tracker system of your car, you drove about the town and the outskirts before stopping at a secluded and remote lay-by near a farm.

“It was in that lay-by that you then raped her. She was only 18. You were significantly older, being at the time 47.

“This must have been a terrifying ordeal for your victim, who was undoubtedly in a vulnerable condition due to her inebriation, which you took advantage of for your own sexual gratification.”

Brown’s operator’s licence was not suspended at the time the offences came to light.

Sources have told The Press and Journal that the Brown’s wife had requested the continuation of the licence at the most recent hearing on June 23.

It is understood those who voted in favour of this did not want to punish her for her husband’s mistakes after hearing that she needed the income from the taxi to provide for her family.

However, all four female members in the committee argued against the licence renewal, as they thought the decision was against public safety.

Councillors Jackie Hendry, Emma Knox, Lyndsey Johnston and Kate MacLean are understood to have voted against it.

Meanwhile, The P&J understands that councillors John Grafton, Ruraidh Stewart, Duncan Macpherson, Chris Birt, Willie MacKay and Sean Kennedy, who is also the chairman of the committee, voted in favour of Brown keeping his taxi operator’s licence.

Misogyny worries raised at Highland Council

Sources in the council have told The P&J they believe there is a pattern of men not taking action against other men who have used violence against women.

It has been argued that “old fashioned misogyny” is still present in the local authority.

It comes after the issue was brought up in full council last week – days after the divisive taxi licence vote.

Councillor Morven-May MacCallum, who was also elected as a regional an MSP for the Highlands and Islands region in May, submitted a motion to introduce steps to reduce misogyny in the council and specifically referenced safety in taxis.

The motion called for the council to “provide training to all councillors on misogyny, focusing on recognising misogyny, empowering all to speak up against misogyny and how to address this issue.”

Speaking in support of the motion, she highlighted that although women “are told to take taxis home, rather than walk”, it has recently been seen they are “not always safe”.

She said: “This motion has been crafted to take the onus off women. For far too long, it’s been women who have been told to watch their drinks in an attempt to prevent spiking.

“It’s women who are told to take taxis home, rather than walk. Taxis, which we have recently seen, are not always safe.

“It’s on the onus of women to keep themselves safe, and for far too long, they are often blamed when this has not been possible.

“This motion seeks to change that by empowering men to speak out about other men’s misogynistic behaviour.

“Violence against women and girls is at an all-time high, and this cannot be accepted.

“We must come together to show that the Highlands will not stand for this kind of behaviour. And that begins with us, as councillors, supporting this motion.”

In response, convener Bill Lobban said he “fully supported” the motion, adding: “I think every single male member of this council should take into consideration the wording of this motion.”

Highland Council shaken by taxi licence approval

The Licensing Committee’s decision to renew David Brown’s taxi operator’s licence has shaken up the local authority.

The P&J understands a number of members were shocked when they heard about the outcome of the item.

Some councillors are said to find the decision as “unbelievable” and “incomprehensible”.

Officially, the council cannot comment on individual applications.

However, the local authority has confirmed its top legal official has lodged paperwork to have the original decision to approve the licence reviewed.

A spokesperson for Highland Council said: “We do not comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private.

“However, we can confirm that a Standing Order 16 Notice of Referral has been initiated by the Chief Officer – Legal and Corporate Governance.

“The licensing committee decision will now be referred to a future meeting of The Highland Council for further consideration.”

There's a shedload of BS about this on twitter etc. But this piece usefully outlines the difference between the badge and plate - there's a thread on twitter with zillions of retweets, in which the individual who started the thread is claiming that not revoking the plate means he can start driving again when he comes out of jail

But from what I read elsewhere the request by the family not to revoke the plate immediately was so that it could be transferred, and the council agreed to that effectively, on the understanding that it would eventually be revoked if it wasn't transferred within a reasonably short period.


Allowing rapist taxi driver to keep operator licence is 'harmful message'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c75ykd32rdko

A taxi driver who raped a teenage female passenger should not be allowed to keep his operator's licence, a rape charity has said.

David Brown, 50, of Croy, near Inverness, was sentenced to six years and nine months in May following his attack on the 18-year-old in December 2023.

Rape and Sexual Abuse Service Highland said allowing a convicted rapist to hold a licence in that same industry was a "harmful message" to women.

Highland Council's licensing committee voted in private last week to allow a taxi operator's licence to continue in his name, despite objections from Police Scotland.

Highland Council said the licensing committee's decision would be referred to a future meeting of full council for further consideration.

Rape and Sexual Abuse Service Highland chief executive, Romy Rehfeld, said: "Our first thoughts are with the victim and her family.

"Decisions like this can cause real additional distress to survivors and risks forcing them to relive their trauma.

"A convicted rapist who used his professional position to attack a young woman should not be permitted to hold a licence in that same industry."

She said it was "troubling" the decision was made in private.

Rehfeld added: "Women and girls in the Highlands deserve to know why Police Scotland's objection was set aside."

Family request

Brown picked up the 18-year-old woman who had been on a night out in Inverness and wanted to go back to her Highland village.

Instead he drove past her destination before pulling into a lay-by near a farm, somewhere between Strathpeffer and Dingwall, and sexually assaulting her.

He then left her in Dingwall in sub-zero temperatures.

Brown had denied the charge of rape and claimed he had a consensual sexual encounter, but was found guilty after a three-day trial in Edinburgh in April.

Brown's taxi driver's licence - which allows him to drive a taxi - was suspended in January 2024 after details of his offences emerged.

His separate taxi operator's licence - which authorises him to run the business - went before Highland licencing committee for review on 23 June.

An operator's licence is not transferable and can be granted for up to three years.

BBC Scotland News understands that a member of Brown's family requested that it be allowed to continue.

The council committee voted to take no action. Other options were to suspend or revoke the licence.

Rules under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 mean councillors are not allowed to comment publicly on matters dealt with in private.

But John Grafton, one of the committee members, told BBC Scotland News he made his decision based on what was presented to the committee.

He added: "Unfortunately, I cannot say any more. I am happy to answer people's questions when it becomes not private."

So as per my initial post above, I suspect it could all be about tranferring a saloon plate because it's got a value, because there's a cap, or perhaps a saloon cap specifically, as opposed to a WAV cap. Maybe

This is an official statement issued by the council


Statement: David Brown, Taxi Operator's Licence

https://www.highland.gov.uk/news/articl ... -s-licence

The Highland Council has issued the following statement following the reporting of a recent decision of the Licensing Committee in respect of David Brown and a Taxi Operator's Licence.

The Council does not normally comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private. However, given the public interest in this item, it's important we clarify some facts:

• Mr Brown does not have a taxi driver’s licence. This was suspended in January 2024. Mr Brown is currently in jail serving his sentence.

• Following his conviction in May 2026, Mr Brown's taxi operator’s licence - a licence for his vehicle - was brought before a recent meeting of the licensing committee for review.

• A taxi operator licence cannot be transferred to another person.

• Following the decision at the committee, a Standing Order 16 Notice of Referral has been initiated by the Chief Officer - Legal and Corporate Governance.

• The licensing committee decision will now be referred to a future meeting of The Highland Council for further consideration by all members.

This is the P&J's report including the council's statement.

And which emphasises that a plate in the name of an individual can't be transferred.

But which all alludes to a huge can of worms that I've been banging on about for years


Highland Council issues rare statement to clarify Inverness rapist taxi driver decision

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... statement/

The local authority has made a rare exception to provide clarification on the case, which was held in private.

Highland Council has issued a rare statement following the decision by six councillors to allow a convicted rapist to keep his taxi operator’s licence.

Yesterday, we revealed that six male councillors had voted to allow David Brown, who was sentenced to six years and nine months in May for raping an 18-year-old female passenger in December 2023, to retain the licence under his name.

It is understood that this was despite strong opposition from all four female councillors on the licensing committee, who are said to have voted to suspend the licence.

Police Scotland had also objected to the rapist to keep his licence.

The Press and Journal understands the vote has caused uproar within the corridors of HQ with the council’s top legal officer taking the extreme step to file documents to have the decision reviewed.

It means those councillors who are not on the local authority’s licensing committee will now have to receive specialist legal training to make a decision at full council, where all 74 members are expected to be present.

Today, Highland Council has made the highly unusual decision to issue a statement offering further clarification on the matter.

The local authority cannot normally comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private, however, it has decided to do so this time due to the “public interest” the decision has generated.

Statement issued after Inverness rapist taxi driver decision

The council wants to emphasise the difference between a taxi driver’s licence and a taxi operator’s licence.

A taxi driver’s licence permits an individual to drive a taxi or private hire vehicle, while a taxi operator’s licence is for the car/vehicle to be operated.

Brown’s taxi driver’s licence was suspended by the licensing committee in January 2024, which was just a month after he raped an 18-year-old female in a lonely lay-by between Strathpeffer and Dingwall.

The Press and Journal understands it was Brown’s wife who asked for the taxi operator’s licence, which is held by him as an individual, to be continued.

We have been told that councillors who backed the licence did not want to punish Brown’s wife for her husband’s crimes after hearing she needed the income from the taxi to provide for her family.

But the four female councillors are said to have argued that doing so would be against “public safety”.

However, a former member of the licensing committee has explained to The P&J that the reasonable decision would have been to ask Brown’s wife to apply for a taxi operator’s licence under her own name.

Highland Council sets out situation of rapist’s taxi licence

A spokesperson for Highland Council said: “We do not normally comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private. However, given the public interest in this item, it’s important we clarify some facts.

• Mr Brown does not have a taxi driver’s licence. This was suspended in January 2024. He is in jail serving his sentence.

• Following conviction, Mr Brown’s taxi operator’s licence – licence for his vehicle – was brought before this month’s licensing committee for review.

• A taxi operator licence cannot be transferred to another person.

• A Standing Order 16 Notice of Referral has been initiated by the Chief Officer – Legal and Corporate Governance.

• The licensing committee decision will now be referred to a future meeting of The Highland Council for further consideration.

The local authority also confirmed the following:

• The taxi operator’s licence is held by Mr Brown as an individual.

• In order to drive the vehicle to which the operator’s licence relates, an individual must have a separate taxi driver’s licence.

• In January 2024, Mr Brown had not been convicted. At that point, members of the licensing committee made the decision to suspend his taxi driver’s licence on the basis that he was not a fit and proper person to hold that particular licence.

Words fail me.

_________________
IDFIMH

A lot of rehash here, but according to this his wife also drives one of his taxis, thus her desire to continue with the plate (or replate the car) is obvious


Highland councillors ‘refute’ misogyny claims after jailed rapist got to keep taxi operator licence as inside sources reveal the real reason for decision amid claims officials could have acted earlier

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... et-439107/

The controversial granting of a taxi operator licence to a convicted rapist came after his wife explained to Highland councillors she needed it as it was her only source of income.

The Inverness Courier broke the news on our website on Monday that a behind-closed-doors licensing hearing allowed David Brown to keep his taxi operator licence despite his conviction for the 2023 rape of an 18-year-old female.

Brown was jailed in May for six years and nine months for the attack on the “vulnerable” woman in a remote lay-by between Dingwall and Strathpeffer, after she had been on a night out in Inverness.

Brown had his taxi driver’s licence suspended in January 2024 after allegations emerged, but the operator’s licence is separate and connected to the vehicle.

The licensing committee voted to continue the licence because they felt that refusal would unfairly impact his wife as she was unable to transfer ownership of the taxi to get her own operator’s licence.

Unnamed sources close to the committee said: “There should be no ambiguity: no one in that committee supported this man, attempted to excuse his actions, or had any sympathy whatsoever for the crime he committed.

“He is a convicted rapist. His victim deserved justice, and he deserves the punishment that has been handed down to him. The committee does not believe he should be driving a taxi.

“Nothing about the committee decision was about defending him, excusing him, protecting him, or allowing him back behind the wheel of a taxi. Any suggestion otherwise is wrong.”

They continued: “His wife attended the hearing and explained that she works as a taxi driver and that she currently drives a taxi registered to him. She told the committee that she was in the process of trying to transfer the vehicle into her own name so that she could apply for the operator’s licence.

“She also explained that she is now effectively a single parent with two dependents, and that this work is currently her family’s only source of income. She asked the committee for a few months to complete those administrative arrangements.”

The sources insisted that was the basis of the committee vote, arguing she “should not be punished for the crimes of her husband”.

They added: “The concern shown was not for the convicted rapist, but for a woman who had committed no crime, who was only trying to support her family.”

The decision has sparked uproar and council officials rushed to have it reconsidered at a future full council meeting.

The naming of councillors who voted in favour - Chris Birt, John Grafton, Sean Kennedy, Willie Mackay, Duncan Macpherson and Ruraidh Stewart- and against - Jackie Hendry, Lyndsey Johnston, Emma Knox and Kate MacLean - has prompted social media outcry and some have gone on the record to “refute” allegations of misogyny in decision-making.

Committee chairman Cllr Kennedy said that misogyny played “no part in the decision”.

Cllr Grafton said: “I can understand how that has come about, what the underlying factors are – I am not a misogynist so I refute the allegation. I believe that on the day all the measures for ensuring public safety were taken into consideration and acted on.”

Concerns about public safety were allayed because an operator’s licence effectively allows the licensing of a vehicle – not to personally operate it as a driver.

Sources have also questioned why council officials didn’t step in and suspend the operator’s licence.

A council spokesperson said: "We do not normally comment on individual licensing cases, especially those held in private. However, given the public interest in this item, it's important we clarify some facts.

“Mr Brown does not have a taxi driver’s licence. This was suspended in January 2024. He is in jail serving his sentence. Following conviction, Mr Brown's taxi operator’s licence - licence for his vehicle - was brought before this month's licensing committee for review.

“A taxi operator licence cannot be transferred to another person. A Standing Order 16 Notice of Referral has been initiated by the chief officer - legal and corporate governance. The licensing committee decision will now be referred to a future meeting of the Highland Council for further consideration.

“In January 2024, Mr Brown had not been convicted. At that point, members of the licensing committee made the decision to suspend his taxi driver's licence on the basis that he was not a fit and proper person to hold that particular licence.”

Police Scotland had officers at the licensing committee meeting and they submitted an objection.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This seems to suggest that there's a finance agreement on the car, and to that extent it has to continue in his name, and thus the plate would have to continue in his name to keep the car licensed. (Or at least that's how I'm reading the highlighted paragraph, after correcting the spelling of the word 'of' to 'off' )

But, I mean, even the photo of the councillor here is bound to provoke kneejerk reactions from a certain demographic in terms of his demographic. I mean, 'gammon', much?


WATCH: Highland Councillor says rapist taxi operator's licence posed ‘no risk to the public’ as Chris Birt explains it won't be valid when David Brown is released

https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... en-439169/

A Highland councillor on the licensing committee said that the taxi operator’s license for convicted rapist David Brown will not be valid when he gets out of prison so there was no risk to the public.

In an interview, Wester Ross, Strathpeffer and Lochalsh Councillor Chris Birt defended the committee's decision as based on not punishing his wife by depriving her of income.

The taxi operator's licence in Brown's name is non-transferable, and she cannot assume ownership of the vehicle she uses as a taxi driver until it is paid off so by not continuing the licence she would have lost her job.



Cllr Birt said: “I voted in that direction, nothing really to do with the convicted criminal but to protect his wife. His wife, Millie Brown, is a taxi driver, continuing to earn her living and to support herself as a taxi driver, working under the operating licence which is owned by the convicted criminal.

“We did not feel, I did not feel and colleagues also did not feel that she should be punished as well by having her means of support removed.”

He also suggested that legal advice in the meeting meant that there would not be a problem because “lots of operator licences operate where the licence holder isn't a taxi driver, as in this case, who employs other people, in this case his wife, to operate for him.

“The licence only has six months to operate, this time about five months it must be now, and we felt the most just and fair approach was to allow that operator's licence to stand for the remaining period of its licence, six months from when we made the decision.”

Cllr Birt reiterated what others already told The Inverness Courier, that there was zero concern for the rapist himself or a risk to the public.

He said: “The criminal being in prison for very much longer than that, to allow his wife to continue to operate and at the end of that licence, she would be able to renew it in her own name and therefore hold the operator licence herself. So that is why we made the decision.

“When I make such decisions, I try to make sure that they're legal, as this was explained by our legal advisor, to decide what outcome would be the most just and fairest, and this seemed to be the fairest one, so to make sure the wife wasn't punished just because her husband had been.

“And there was absolutely obviously no additional risk to the public. She's a taxi driver at present, a safe taxi driver, she's continuing to be like other taxi drivers, there's no reason to think that the safety of the public was in any way infringed. So that's why I made that decision.”