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

Hull driver loses license. Right or wrong?
http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=15150
Page 1 of 3

Author:  Sussex [ Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Hull driver loses license. Right or wrong?

Taxi driver loses licence after attacking burglar to 'protect his family'

A TAXI driver who attacked a burglar to "protect his family" has now lost his licence. Grandfather Kenny O'Loughlin gained a criminal record after hitting the thief, who took coats filled with mobile phones and wallets, from a Christmas party in west Hull last December. Now, after confirming to Hull City Council that he has a criminal record, the 51-year-old has lost his taxi licence and livelihood.

Mr O'Loughlin, who lives in Cottingham Road, north Hull, said: "In 20 years of taxiing I haven't had a complaint once and this record wasn't because I attacked a customer, or did anything while I was on duty.
Click here for more

"On the late shifts on Friday and Saturdays you can get some customers who get quite loud and argumentative. "I've never once lashed out at them, so I don't have anger management issues. "What I did, I did to protect my family. "I regret hurting the lad but I don't regret my actions – anyone else would have done the same."

Mr O'Loughlin was given a suspended prison sentence at Doncaster Crown Court in July this year, after pleading guilty to a section 20 assault charge. The hearing heard how Mr O'Loughlin had punched thief Paul Coultas four or five times and dragged him to the kerb.

Coultas had taken items from a party in De Grey Street when he was spotted by one of the partygoers. After the assault, Coultas spent time in intensive care before being sentenced to 12 months in prison for handling stolen goods. Mr O'Loughlin's licence was taken by Hull City Council's licensing committee last week.

A spokesman said the authority could not comment on individual cases.

Author:  wannabeeahack [ Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

How long before the sneak thief launches a compo claim against the ex-taxi driver?

This is Britain in 2010

Author:  MR T [ Wed Oct 20, 2010 9:36 pm ]
Post subject: 

Probably an honest man... that told the truth... should have said he was defending himself.

Author:  wannabeeahack [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:32 am ]
Post subject: 

Heres one that went the right way

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/top- ... 3037963/2/

Author:  Nigel [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hull driver loses license. Right or wrong?

Sussex wrote:
Taxi driver loses licence after attacking burglar to 'protect his family'

A TAXI driver who attacked a burglar to "protect his family" has now lost his licence. Grandfather Kenny O'Loughlin gained a criminal record after hitting the thief, who took coats filled with mobile phones and wallets, from a Christmas party in west Hull last December. Now, after confirming to Hull City Council that he has a criminal record, the 51-year-old has lost his taxi licence and livelihood.

Mr O'Loughlin, who lives in Cottingham Road, north Hull, said: "In 20 years of taxiing I haven't had a complaint once and this record wasn't because I attacked a customer, or did anything while I was on duty.
Click here for more

"On the late shifts on Friday and Saturdays you can get some customers who get quite loud and argumentative. "I've never once lashed out at them, so I don't have anger management issues. "What I did, I did to protect my family. "I regret hurting the lad but I don't regret my actions – anyone else would have done the same."

Mr O'Loughlin was given a suspended prison sentence at Doncaster Crown Court in July this year, after pleading guilty to a section 20 assault charge. The hearing heard how Mr O'Loughlin had punched thief Paul Coultas four or five times and dragged him to the kerb.

Coultas had taken items from a party in De Grey Street when he was spotted by one of the partygoers. After the assault, Coultas spent time in intensive care before being sentenced to 12 months in prison for handling stolen goods. Mr O'Loughlin's licence was taken by Hull City Council's licensing committee last week.

A spokesman said the authority could not comment on individual cases.


There should be no issues here he should have kept his badge.

Like any person in the UK if they found someone lifting their property they'd do what any man would do and that's give him the hiding of his life.

If you priofit from crime you've got to take the consequences that some with it.

Author:  Chris the Fish [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:50 am ]
Post subject: 

I'd love to read the report put before Hull CC but in their infinite wisdom it is withheld. Seeing that the Court case was not "in camera" I wonder if there is something else we are not seeing.

As far as the newspaper report goes, it seems over the top to ban the driver, but we and the paper are not privvy to the whole story.

I would like to see all quasi judicial process being carried out in the open - in all areas, not just licensing.

Author:  edders23 [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:25 pm ]
Post subject: 

Usually something like this you are asked to appear before the licensing committee and if he was given that chance he should have got the benefit of the doubt as he would have had a previously unblemished record.

it looks from the article that he was not given that chance surely grounds for an appeal via the magistrates court ?

Author:  Sussex [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

Chris the Fish wrote:
I wonder if there is something else we are not seeing.

He broke the law by not stopping when the danger was over.

Author:  wannabeeahack [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

Quote:
The hearing heard how Mr O'Loughlin had punched thief Paul Coultas four or five times and dragged him to the kerb.



infers the dishing out of summary justice took place on the street, i.e. away from the home/etc.

Author:  Skull [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

Look, you lot, have got to be kidding. These councillors should be burnt at the stake, guillotined or hanged or something equally as appropriate for their decision.


What is it with this trade, is being treated with some dignity, a foreign bloody language or something? If a Councillor had defended his family the way this man has he'd be hailed as a hero, not kicked out of office.

For feck sake wake up!!!
:roll:

Author:  Chris the Fish [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

Skull if I had the FULL story I may well agree with you, but I (and you) am not privvy to it all.

If on appeal he gets his licence back I will be delighted and I wish that in that scenario the Councillors could be called to account.

But it aint the world we live in.

All anyone can do is try to improve the system.

Author:  Skull [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:02 pm ]
Post subject: 

Chris the Fish wrote:
Skull if I had the FULL story I may well agree with you, but I (and you) am not privvy to it all.

If on appeal he gets his licence back I will be delighted and I wish that in that scenario the Councillors could be called to account.

But it aint the world we live in.

All anyone can do is try to improve the system.


Let's get something straight Chris, you lot, have been servile for so long you would accept any old shi* as long as it comes from above.

What the feck happened to your backbone?

At the very worst, if this guy had gone too far then a reprimand would have been sufficient. To revoke his license has nothing to do with him being a “fit and proper person”. It's simply an example of the power they have over all of you and a warning, of what you can expect, if you step out of line.

I say again, and I don't give a shi* about the circumstances, if this had been a councillor he would have been hailed as a hero.

Have you learned your lesson Chris? Don't answer that, I already know the answer. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Author:  Chris the Fish [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:17 pm ]
Post subject: 

Skull are you saying that nobody ever should lose their licence? I don't think so.

Unless you get the whole story, not necessarily just on one incident, you can't judge.

It is wrong that Councils routinely come to decisions after hearings in camera. It should be the exception not the rule that hearings are held behind closed doors. The deliberations should certainly be private, just as a jury in a court case.

Author:  captain cab [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:21 pm ]
Post subject: 

Chris the Fish wrote:

It is wrong that Councils routinely come to decisions after hearings in camera.


You're right, the expense of those big cameras is frightening

CC

Author:  Skull [ Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:27 pm ]
Post subject: 

Chris the Fish wrote:
Skull are you saying that nobody ever should lose their licence? I don't think so.

Unless you get the whole story, not necessarily just on one incident, you can't judge.

It is wrong that Councils routinely come to decisions after hearings in camera. It should be the exception not the rule that hearings are held behind closed doors. The deliberations should certainly be private, just as a jury in a court case.


It's against your human rights to have hearings in private, if you choose not to, but it doesn't stop them doing it. You have a choice, but like everything else it takes backbone not to accept someone pi**ing down your back while tell you it's raining.

What we need is another Derek Bird situation, but this time, it needs to be councillors he takes out instead of innocent individuals.

The world would be a better place to live in that day. I'd throw a fecking party.





:-|

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/