Taxi Driver Online
https://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operator
https://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=40199		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  StuartW [ Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:48 am ]
Post subject:  Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operator
This isn't very exciting, but a bit unusual to see both operator and driver prosecuted at the same time?

(Apart from in Tewkesbury, obviously :? )


Gloucester Cars Plc guilty of operating vehicles without a licence

https://tewkesbury.gov.uk/gloucester-ca ... a-licence/

Tewkesbury Borough Council has successfully prosecuted two individuals for offences relating to licensing of private hire vehicles.

On 22 January 2024, Mr Mahomed Kala of Massey Road, Gloucester, Director of Gloucester Cars Limited, pleaded guilty to being a licensed private hire operator and using an unlicensed driver to carry out work for the company.

Mr Kala was fined £224 and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £90. He was also ordered to pay £500 costs to the council.

On the same day, Mr Iqbal Moolla of Hatfield Road, Gloucester, pleaded guilty to being the driver of the vehicle, operating as a private hire driver without a licence.

Mr Moolla was fined £65 and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £26. He was also ordered to pay £500 costs to the council.

Tewkesbury Borough Council’s Lead Member for Clean and Green Environment, Councillor Sarah Hands, said “Our primary concern in matters such as these is public safety.

“Our licensing team regularly carries out checks to ensure all private hire vehicles and drivers are licensed and safe for the public to use. Without these checks public safety would be jeopardised.”

Tewkesbury Borough Council brought the case to prosecution following contract compliance checks undertaken by Gloucestershire County Council officers on 22 May 2023.

Tewkesbury Borough Council’s Licensing team worked on the prosecution with assistance from both the council’s Counter Fraud and Enforcement Unit and One Legal, a legal service shared by Cheltenham Borough Council, Gloucester City Council, Stroud District Council and Tewkesbury Borough Council.

Anyone can report their concerns regarding unlicensed taxis or private hire vehicles online by visiting Guidance for taxi and private hire passengers – Tewkesbury Borough Council.
Author:  StuartW [ Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operato
Quote:
Mr Moolla was fined £65 and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £26. He was also ordered to pay £500 costs to the council.

The financial penalties imposed certainly modest, especially for the driver here. Although the costs obviously represent a reasonably substantial penalty.

But presumably money's no object anyway to Mr Moolla :lol:
Author:  edders23 [ Tue Feb 06, 2024 9:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operato
would have been better and easier to compare if a single thread covered both cases but I suspect 1 case was a completely unlicensed vehicle and the second maybe a licensed Gloucester PH operating outside cross border rules
Author:  StuartW [ Tue Feb 06, 2024 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operato
Edders, you're right - when comparing the financial penalties I missed the fact that although it was the two unbadged drivers I was focusing on, in one case the car was plated, while in the other case it wasn't. So maybe the more lenient treatment of one unbadged driver was because the car was unplated, and he should have known that, and to that extent driving while unbadged is worse if the car is also unplated.

Or something like that.

But I think you're wrong about the cross-border stuff. It was simply a case of two unbadged drivers, but in one case the car was plated, while in the other case the car wasn't plated :?

And, yes, with hindsight both articles would maybe have been better in the same thread, but it was only later that I had a look at the older one and realised the huge difference in financial penalties imposed on the two drivers, which was why I ended up comparing the two pieces :-o

On the other hand, to view the two articles side-by-side, they're actually easier to compare having them open in two different tabs and flicking between the two tabs, rather than having them both in the same thread and scrolling up and down the thread.
Author:  StuartW [ Tue Feb 06, 2024 10:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tewkesbury prosecutes both unlicensed driver and operato
Tewkesbury Borough Council wrote:
Gloucester Cars Plc guilty of operating vehicles without a licence

Just like the other piece - which uses apparently inaccurate terminology at at least one point - not sure if the headline is actually correct, strictly speaking. Nothing in the actual press release to suggest that the *vehicle(s)* used were actually unlicensed. It was the driver who was unbadged, and both the driver and operator were prosecuted because of that rather than for using an unlicensed vehicle.

Which at least is what it looks like to me comparing the headline to what's actually in the article [-(
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/