Sussex wrote:
JD wrote:
Mr Crowe had been allowed to continue driving on a temporary agreement while the appeal was active but that has now expired.
It's issues like this that make me think one of the admendments to the Road Safety Bill might not be a good one.
If the mush can't work during his appeal, then is that fair in this case?

Not many Taxi drivers will agree with amending that particular section and the National Taxi associations should write to the DfT stating as such. However the sticking point is what to do with drivers who commit serious offences and who might endanger the public if allowed to drive?
I think it is this area and this area alone that needs looking at. A distinction should be made between offences unlikely to impact on the public and those that are.
Giving councillors the power to remove the livelihood of every driver no matter what the offence, is a step to far.
Regards
JD