Uber driver refused to pick up woman with assistance doghttps://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/ ... tance-dog/A COURT was told of the “frustrations” of a disabled woman who has repeatedly been denied service because of her assistance dog.
In the latest instance an Uber driver refused to pick her and the dog from a booking at Bradford Royal Infirmary.
On Friday, Syed Nafees Ul Hassan appeared at Bradford Magistrates Court where he pleaded guilty to failing to accept a booking by a disabled person accompanied by assistance dog.
He was ordered to pay over £930, and the court heard he had also been stripped of his taxi licence by Bradford Council due to the incident.
Hassan, of Chippendale Rise in Allerton, told the court he refused the fare because he had become allergic to dogs after playing with his brother’s pets on a recent trip to Pakistan.
The case was being prosecuted by Bradford Council, and relates to an incident on October 16.
On that date the complainant, a disabled woman who requires an assistance dog to get around, had booked an Uber to pick her up from BRI.
The car, driven by Hassan, arrived at 8.28pm.
The court was shown a video, taken by the complainant, of the interaction between her and the driver.
He appeared to show reluctance to allowing the dog in the vehicle, she said: “It’s an assistance dog, you have to take her.”
When he shook his head, she replied “Are you sure? I’m videoing this – you will lose your job if you don’t take us.
“It is against the law, you need to take us.”
He refused to do so and then drove off.
Waseem Raja, prosecuting on behalf of Bradford Council, told magistrates the court received a complaint the following day.
He said: “It is right to say the complainant continuously tried to inform the gentleman that it was against the law to refuse to transport them.
“The defendant continued to ignore this, and refused the booking.”
The council interviewed the driver several days later, and although he read out a prepared statement, he provided “no comment” to many questions.
He had been an Uber driver for a year by that point, and Mr Raja said Uber had confirmed they give all drivers training, including disability awareness and the need to recognise assistance dogs.
He said drivers can sometimes be provided with exemption certificates if they provide medical evidence that they have a condition such as a severe allergy to dogs.
Mr Hassan had never been granted such a certificate – Mr Raja said.
He added: “As a result of this incident, the decision was made to revoke his licence on the basis he was not a fit and proper person to hold a taxi licence.”
Speaking through an Urdu interpreter, Hassan said: “A short while before this I was in Pakistan – my brother has dogs over there. I was very attached to them and playing with them.
“After that there was a problem – I become allergic to dogs.”
He said he had a letter from a doctor in Islamabad confirming he was allergic to dogs.
Hassan added: “He said I need to keep a distance from dogs. I didn’t know I needed an exemption certificate.”
Mr Raja argued that the Uber training would have made clear the need for a certificate for any driver with an allergy to dogs.
He went on to say that incidents like this could have a “lasting effect” on disabled people, and this woman in particular had been refused service by a number of taxi drivers in the past.
He read out a victim impact statement to the court that said: “This is not the first time a taxi driver has refused to transport me and my dog.
“I’m so annoyed with the way the taxi driver treated me and her on the day in question.
“Not only did the driver refused to take me, he just drove around the car park and picked up another passenger without giving me a second thought.
“I’ve had numerous taxis refuse to take me.
"Now I’m getting to the point where it is getting really frustrating.
"I feel very vulnerable as a victim when all I’m doing is trying to get around.
“I don’t use other forms of transport. I rely on taxis.”
Asked if he had anything more to say, Hassan said: “I’m a person, I made a mistake. I apologise for it.”
Magistrates fined Hassan £333 and ordered him to pay a £133 surcharge and £470 costs.
Login
Register
FAQ
