Surprised the e-word isn't mentioned here, but that's presumably what a lot of the discussion here is alluding to
Have to take the driver's side here - maybe he did the wrong thing and was a tad dishonest. But, I mean, to put him out of work for this?
Unusual that it's a failure to renew scenario as well, rather than a suspension or revocation...
And the article consistently blabbers on about this 'cabbie', and even the official minutes use the term 'taxi driver'
Bristol cabbie banned for giving unlawful ride to undercover cophttps://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bris ... l-11128576Bristol city councillors refused to renew his private hire licenceA Bristol cabbie has lost his licence after giving a ride unlawfully to an undercover police officer posing as a passenger at the roadside – but claims he was ‘tricked’ by the ruse.
Private hire drivers, unlike taxi/hackney cab operators, can only accept pre-booked journeys and not customers who flag them down, which invalidates their insurance.
City councillors refused to renew the man’s licence after hearing a plain-clothes officer knocked on his car window in Stokes Croft and asked to go to Temple Meads station where his dad was, which the cabbie agreed to after the ‘passenger’ confirmed he had cash.
But the officer was conducting an operation to detect offences of illegal plying for hire by private hire drivers with Avon & Somerset Police taxi compliance officer PC Patrick Quinton who pulled the vehicle over on Bond Street.
Recently published minutes of the behind-closed-doors meeting at City Hall in July said the driver contended that the officer who asked for the lift told him his dad was ‘stuck at the train station and pleaded with him to help’.
The report said: “He said he sounded desperate and was asking for help.
“He said as soon as [the passenger] was in the car he made a phone call to his ‘dad’, and said, ‘Dad, I'm on the way, I'm in the taxi’.
“He said that was a ‘trick’, as he was speaking to PC Quinton.”
The minutes of the Bristol City Council public safety and protection sub-committee said the cabbie admitted he was aware he had broken the law ‘but the police should not have done what they did to him’.
But the papers said: “PC Quinton clarified that it is normal during undercover operations for the officer inside the vehicle to ring him to let him know they are in the vehicle and their location.”
They said the plain-clothes constable was fully trained in how to act during a test purchasing operation.
“A taxi driver is given the opportunity to break the law. He is not coerced or persuaded to break the law,” the minutes said.
They said the cabbie told the officer during the police sting around 1am on December 28 last year that the fare would be £10 but that he pocketed £30 from the passenger.
The three £10 notes were marked and were retrieved at the scene by PC Quinton as evidence.
The minutes said the driver, who has held a private hire licence for at least 23 years, subsequently denied agreeing a fare or being given £30.
They said that when he was pulled over by police, he told the passenger: “You are my friend, okay?”
The cabbie told PC Quinton that he did not have a booking because the customer was his friend ‘although he was unable to tell PC Quinton his name, claiming he could not remember’.
PC Quinton reported him to the council for unlawfully plying for hire and no insurance, adding that ‘all officers are thoroughly briefed prior to undertaking undercover operations and they are fully aware that they must not persuade or pressurise PHD’s to transport them’.
The sub-committee ruled that the cabbie was unlawfully plying for hire and had invalidated his insurance, so he was no longer a ‘fit and proper person to hold a licence’.
The minutes added: “Plying for hire is a serious matter because not only does it deprive legitimately licensed hackney carriage drivers of their trade, but it also places the public at risk.”
They said councillors considered the evidence of both police officers was reliable and truthful but that the driver’s account had changed and was ‘inconsistent and untruthful’.
Login
Register
FAQ
)