Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Sat Apr 04, 2026 5:52 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: You couldn't make it up.
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2004 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57242
Location: 1066 Country
Labour scrutiny boss loses taxi license

A TAXI driver and leading Labour councillor has been stripped of his taxi license for repeatedly not declaring a criminal conviction.

Joginder Bal, who represents the Farnham ward, had his Hackney Carriage license withdrawn at a meeting of the Licensing Committee earlier this month.

This week, it emerged that Mr Bal, chairman of the powerful Scrutiny and Overview Committee which acts as a watchdog on the ruling cabinet, did not disclose his conviction for common assault in 1999.

Mr Bal was fined £100 after he admitted hitting the father of his niece's children over the head as he feared the youngsters were being threatened. At the time, Mr Bal faced calls to withdraw his nomination, but he continued his political aspirations and was finally elected in 2001.

Mr Bal has held a taxi licence since 1996, but a check of national criminal records conducted every three years, revealed he has never declared the common assault conviction on his annual licensing application.

The panel's decision in the run-up to next month's elections resurrects the spectre of Slough sleaze which blighted the political scene several years ago. "People coming before the licensing appeals' panel with records should not get a license for between three and five years, depending on the severity of the offences," the source said. "He has been driving around for years with a license he should not have had."

Cllr Richard Stokes, leader of the opposition Britwellian, Independent, Liberal and Liberal Democrat Group, said cllr Bal's position as chairman of the scrutiny committee should be reconsidered. "I'm all for people making amends, but cllr Bal has not told the truth," he said. "If he does not tell the truth, he is not fit to chair the scrutiny committee which is about getting the facts and acting impartially."

Mr Bal replied that he declared his offences when he stood for election and that they were a matter of public record. "I've apologised to the licensing committee and explained my failure to declare my offences was due to a misunderstanding on my part of the question contained on the declaration form," he said.

Mr Bal is appealing against the licensing committee's decision and is awaiting a hearing in the Crown Court. He has also referred the case to the Standards Board and would not discuss it further until they had had a chance to investigate."

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 2:31 am 
Sussex wrote:
Labour scrutiny boss loses taxi license

A TAXI driver and leading Labour councillor has been stripped of his taxi license for repeatedly not declaring a criminal conviction.

Joginder Bal, who represents the Farnham ward, had his Hackney Carriage license withdrawn at a meeting of the Licensing Committee earlier this month.

This week, it emerged that Mr Bal, chairman of the powerful Scrutiny and Overview Committee which acts as a watchdog on the ruling cabinet, did not disclose his conviction for common assault in 1999.

Mr Bal was fined £100 after he admitted hitting the father of his niece's children over the head as he feared the youngsters were being threatened. At the time, Mr Bal faced calls to withdraw his nomination, but he continued his political aspirations and was finally elected in 2001.

Mr Bal has held a taxi licence since 1996, but a check of national criminal records conducted every three years, revealed he has never declared the common assault conviction on his annual licensing application.

The panel's decision in the run-up to next month's elections resurrects the spectre of Slough sleaze which blighted the political scene several years ago. "People coming before the licensing appeals' panel with records should not get a license for between three and five years, depending on the severity of the offences," the source said. "He has been driving around for years with a license he should not have had."

Cllr Richard Stokes, leader of the opposition Britwellian, Independent, Liberal and Liberal Democrat Group, said cllr Bal's position as chairman of the scrutiny committee should be reconsidered. "I'm all for people making amends, but cllr Bal has not told the truth," he said. "If he does not tell the truth, he is not fit to chair the scrutiny committee which is about getting the facts and acting impartially."

Mr Bal replied that he declared his offences when he stood for election and that they were a matter of public record. "I've apologised to the licensing committee and explained my failure to declare my offences was due to a misunderstanding on my part of the question contained on the declaration form," he said.

Mr Bal is appealing against the licensing committee's decision and is awaiting a hearing in the Crown Court. He has also referred the case to the Standards Board and would not discuss it further until they had had a chance to investigate."



all good political knockout stuff

however guidance from the department of transport says that one can say none to questions on convictions if they are spent.

another defeat at the hands of the liberal backing johnson press on fairness.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 1:17 pm 
A conviction that inccurs a fine only becomes spent after 5 years.

When you say its ok for people not declare concvitions if they become spent - would you find it acceptable if it was for indency etc.....

No

That Mr Bal knew exactly what he was doing and got caught out for it.

Good.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2004 7:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57242
Location: 1066 Country
In the taxi/PH trade now, a conviction never becomes spent.

Even a caution shows up on a CRB Enhance check. :shock:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:33 am 
Anonymous wrote:
A conviction that inccurs a fine only becomes spent after 5 years.

When you say its ok for people not declare concvitions if they become spent - would you find it acceptable if it was for indency etc.....

No

That Mr Bal knew exactly what he was doing and got caught out for it.

Good.



indecency convictions are never spent
now pal get to know your subject or keep mum.

cos at the moment you dont know what you are talking about.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2004 3:36 am 
Sussex wrote:
In the taxi/PH trade now, a conviction never becomes spent.

Even a caution shows up on a CRB Enhance check. :shock:


you Sussex and the councils that say the same are wrong, very wrong yes they show up on checks course they do but some are still spent,

read the book boyo.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 22, 2004 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57242
Location: 1066 Country
I can read as many books as you would like me to, but guidance from the Home Office is all I need.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 4:14 am 
Sussex wrote:
I can read as many books as you would like me to, but guidance from the Home Office is all I need.


well sussex
guidance from the transport dept is all I need.


and all this slagging off of councillor brothers is nausiating.

its disgracefull this lad has done hardly nothing and one berk thinks he should be treated like a child molester!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 12:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2003 10:45 am
Posts: 913
Location: Plymouth, i think, i'll just check the A to Z!
Anonymous wrote:

its disgracefull this lad has done hardly nothing and one berk thinks he should be treated like a child molester!


i wouldn't call a conviction for assult 'hardly nothing'. that in its self should be enough to not have a taxi licence in the first place. and then to try and get away with not declaring it just adds weight to their case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 2:16 pm 
steveo wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

its disgracefull this lad has done hardly nothing and one berk thinks he should be treated like a child molester!


i wouldn't call a conviction for assult 'hardly nothing'. that in its self should be enough to not have a taxi licence in the first place. and then to try and get away with not declaring it just adds weight to their case.



OK, lets all get at the councillor, his biggest crime in your eyes is that he is a councillor!

and thats my point, anyway Steve in your area killers get licenses and in preston they go to rapists.

do you walk on water because you cant swim?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 23, 2004 6:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57242
Location: 1066 Country
Anonymous wrote:
OK, lets all get at the councillor, his biggest crime in your eyes is that he is a councillor!


The thing is that through-out this great land of ours, councillors and their officails preach to us about what is right, and what is wrong.

So when they stray from the good and narrow, then I'm going to preach. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 9:43 am 
Anonymous wrote:
Sussex wrote:
I can read as many books as you would like me to, but guidance from the Home Office is all I need.


well sussex
guidance from the transport dept is all I need.


and all this slagging off of councillor brothers is nausiating.

its disgracefull this lad has done hardly nothing and one berk thinks he should be treated like a child molester!


It appears that you have some affiliation with this guy.

So because he's a councillor - its okay, he didn't mean it, he was confused - and nobody has labelled him as a child molester - talk about taking something out of context - you muppet.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 2:57 pm 
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Sussex wrote:
I can read as many books as you would like me to, but guidance from the Home Office is all I need.


well sussex
guidance from the transport dept is all I need.



I have no affiliations with him, dont know him, just know the likes of you, who thinks hes on for his own self interest

yet youve no evidence for this he has a hobby working for the community, would you pick on him if he run the local carate club?


It appears that you have some affiliation with this guy.

So because he's a councillor - its okay, he didn't mean it, he was confused - and nobody has labelled him as a child molester - talk about taking something out of context - you muppet.


me the muppet? no you green with envy.

and all this slagging off of councillor brothers is nausiating.

its disgracefull this lad has done hardly nothing and one berk thinks he should be treated like a child molester!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 7:22 pm 
Now children,keep calm,lets all have our point of view,but no nasty slanging off.

Peaceful Joseph.

I know of instances north of the border,where individuals have received taxi badges for worse offences than this.
It sometimes frightens me to think how many nutters have badges.


Peaceful Jim (Joe,s Brother.)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 6:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 57242
Location: 1066 Country
Blimey guv'nor we are starting to sound like that dodgy councillor. :wink:

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1041 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group