Bristol Uber driver banned for preying on lone female passengershttps://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... g-11108424An Uber driver who preyed on lone female passengers in Bristol has been banned from being a cabbie.
The private hire vehicle licence holder had three separate allegations of sexual misconduct and inappropriate behaviour upheld by a panel of city councillors.
The driver, referred to only as CB in the recently published minutes of the public safety and protection sub-committee, denied the allegations.
But the panel concluded he ‘demonstrated a very concerning pattern of behaviour towards lone female passengers’.
A report from the meeting at City Hall, held behind closed doors, said Uber had ‘permanently deleted’ his driver account in March ‘due to reports of sexual misconduct’.
It said two other similar complaints about inappropriate behaviour against lone women by the cabbie, who was working for another operator at the time of the hearing in June, had been received.
The minutes said: “CB stated that during the incident in March 2026 he was providing a polite and respectful customer service, making what he described as compliments with no inappropriate intent or motive, and emphasised that his conduct was consistent with professional standards.”
He said a previous accusation in April last year came from a conversation with a female passenger that was ‘general in nature, discussing historical differences in society’.
The report said: “The cabbie denied making any inappropriate or threatening comments, stating he would not use such language as he was brought up with good manners.”
It said: “CB added that he often speaks openly with customers and believed the passenger had misunderstood the conversation.
“CB highlighted his long experience and high ratings. CB stated that in his experience of completing over 17,000 journeys, only these complaints had been made, which he described as exaggerated or untrue.”
But the panel revoked his private hire driver (PHD) licence with immediate effect ‘in the interests of public safety’, and also stripped the cabbie of his private hire vehicle (PHV) licence.
Its decision said: “His explanations concerning the incidents were not found to be plausible and on a balance of probabilities, it was considered that the three complaints against CB were essentially truthful.
“This therefore demonstrated a very concerning pattern of behaviour towards lone female passengers.
“In reaching this decision the committee asked themselves the following question as posed by the National Standards: ‘Without any prejudice, and based on the information before you, would you allow a person for whom you care, regardless of their condition, to travel alone in a vehicle driven by this person at any time of day or night?’.
“On the balance of probabilities, the answer to this question was no and, as such, CB was no longer a fit and proper person to hold either a PHD or PHV licence.”
The minutes said Avon & Somerset Police told the sub-committee that the driver was involved in an ‘altercation’ during a minor traffic collision in February 2023 and speeding at 53mph on the 40mph-limit A4 Portway in April 2024.
They said the cabbie claimed that a housemate working for Uber Eats took his vehicle without permission while he was asleep and was responsible for the speeding offence.
“However, CB was on record as working at the time of the April 2024 speeding offence, and that CB would have had a passenger on board at the time of the offence,” the report said.
This raised the possibility of an additional offence of fraud by false representation, it said.
The minutes said: “Members queried why the individual would use CB’s Uber account if the payments were being credited to CB’s account instead of his own.
“CB confirmed that Uber payments go directly into his account despite the alleged unauthorised use and stated he was not aware of the individual taking the vehicle on any other occasion.
“The committee members were somewhat puzzled as to what incentive there would be for another person to use CB’s PHV in the manner he had described and further questions were asked, which CB was not able to answer satisfactorily.
“The committee members therefore considered CB’s account to be not credible.
“The committee concluded that it was more probable than not that CB was the driver at the time of the incident and had been untruthful by declaring someone else as the driver to avoid penalty points.
“This, on its own, was sufficient cause for the committee to reach a decision to revoke CB’s licences since the council’s policy on dishonesty will apply.”
Login
Register
FAQ
