Taxi Driver Online

This is the official council news release.


Taxi driver fined for refusing to carry passengers

https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/taxi-driver ... passengers

21 February 2023

A taxi driver who refused to take a passenger to Ernesettle has been ordered to pay a total of £670 in fines and costs by Plymouth Magistrates.

Sabastian Viorescu from Kepple Street, refused to carry passengers who were part of a Council test purchasing operation in the early hours of 30 July last summer at the taxi rank close to the Barbican Leisure complex

Viorescu pleaded guilty at the Magistrates Court yesterday (Monday) to an offence under section 53 of the Town and Police Clauses Act 1847. Under the act any driver who refuses or neglects without reasonable excuse to drive a passenger within the city boundaries commits an offence.

The 46-year-old was fined £300, ordered to pay costs of £250 and a £120 victim surcharge.

A taxi driver for 11 years, he told the court he had always tried to do his best for Plymouth, but the job had become so stressful that he now only drives his taxi in the day. He did not remember the incident but accepts the officers’ evidence but said was out of character.

Councillor Pat Patel, Cabinet Member with responsibility for taxi licensing, said: “We will not tolerate drivers who refuse customers without cause. The majority of our taxi drivers provide an excellent service and we need the public’s help to stop the minority who break the laws give our drivers a bad name.”

He added: “People should be able to get a taxi home anywhere within the city boundary without issues. This behaviour affects the trust of taxi services and people will take risks and walk home instead or worse, drive after drinking.”

Test purchase operations will continue until drivers stop refusing multiple drops and fares to areas out of the city, such as Southway, Plympton and Plymstock to name a few.

If passengers feel that a taxi driver or private hire driver has in some way overcharged or refused the journey without reasonable excuse, make a note of the plate number or vehicle registration and report it to www.plymouth.gov.uk/howdidIdo

Not difficult to spot the legal inconsistency there

It's either been stated incorrectly, or reported incorrectly.

These are all areas within the City Boundary, as is the target destination, Ernesettle, of the "Mystery Shoppers" or "Council test purchasing operation" team.

Perhaps it should have said "stop refusing...fares to areas out of the city CENTRE".

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related

Ouch that'll dent his earnings for the month

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

Yeah right.

_________________
IDFIMH

Thanks for the clarification, Chris - I did think that might have been the explanation, but assumed you could clarify it pretty quickly rather than me faffing about looking for maps of the city boundary etc

And it's not a newspaper error, or whatever, because it's the text of the official council press release, so a pretty poor show

(And brings back memories of that thing about the cherry picking and card payments stuff a couple of years ago, when it was initially unclear to us outsiders if Tamerton Foliot was inside or outside the city boundary and thus might have justified the job refusal, and that wasn't made clear in the article. Turns out it was within the city boundary, so the driver was out of order saying he didn't have time to do the job:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=37145&p=410909#p410878 )

I suppose it makes sense to locals.

They would usually automatically separate the City Centre from the suburbs that are actually inside the boundary.

I still find it strange that just about everywhere else has a problem with Cherry Picking meaning hanging on for the longer job, but here they seem to want RTFC!

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related