Agenda item

The Hackney Carriage Driver was in attendance with his Legal Representatives.

P C Quinton was also in attendance.

PC Quinton outlined the background to the case as follows:

·         He had stopped the Driver and had established that he was not using his meter;

·         The Driver confirmed he usually used a meter but the passenger had offered a price of £20 for the journey and he had agreed;

·         The Driver had been polite and cooperative;

·         There was also an issue with the plates, the front plate had expired and the Driver had explained this was due to the Council sending him the wrong plate;

·         He had body camera evidence available, but did not think this was essential for the Committee to see as the Driver did not dispute what had happened.

The Neighbourhood Enforcement Officer reported:

·           The Driver’s Licence was due to expires in 2020;

·           The Driver had held a licence since 2005 which had been revoked in September 2008 following an incident involving theft and the receipt of stolen goods;

·           The Driver was re-licenced in 2013.

The Driver’s Legal Representative outlined his case as follows:

·           The Driver accepted the facts of the case and that his plates were not as they should have been;

·           He knew he should have used his meter, but the passenger had requested the fixed fee of £20 and said this was the usual price and so he wasn’t trying to overcharge her or be dishonest;

·           He accepted he should not have done it, but he wanted to please the customer and not defraud her;

·           He accepted the rules and knew they were there to protect vulnerable passengers;

·           In relation to the display of plates, he was aware that there was a problem in his local area with thieves stealing taxi plates at night and so he was in the habit of removing his front plate at night.  Unfortunately, on this occasion he forgot to put it back on;

·           The plate had the wrong date on it and he said the Council had sent him the wrong one but he rectified the situation by asking the Council to send him the correct plate;

·           He had made an error, but it was not intentional and the correct plate was displayed at the back of the vehicle;

·           He was a good and safe driver with no points on his licence and was not a threat to the public;

·           He was courteous and had a personal reference to say he worked hard and was a family man with two young children.

In summing up, the Driver’s Legal Representative asked the Committee to consider him a fit and proper person to hold a licence and to issue him with a warning on this occasion rather than taking any further action.

The Driver confirmed that he knew it was a requirement of Bristol City Council to use the meter; he was sorry and had learnt from the experience.

At this point in the meeting the Licence Holder, his representatives and the Neighbourhood Enforcement Officer withdrew from the meeting while the Committee considered whether to take any action as a result of the investigation.  They returned to the meeting to hear the decision.

RESOLVED – that the Driver be issued with a warning letter which would remain on his file and no further action be taken in relation to the incident.

Reason

The Driver knew he should have used the taxi meter for the fare in question but the Committee believed his version of events as to why it happened.  In the circumstances the Committee did not consider that it would be proportionate to revoke or suspend his licence but that a warning should be issued on this occasion.