Taxi Driver Online

'Cherry-pick' cabbies face licence threat Jun 30 2006




By Greg O'Keeffe, Liverpool Echo


CABBIES who refuse fares because they will not make enough money face losing their licence under a new crackdown.

Two drivers have already been suspended from working in Liverpool after they were caught "cherry-picking" on CCTV.

One of them was filmed waiting for 18 minutes at a peak time and turned away 13 people trying to hire his cab.

The second driver was spotted waiting 12 minutes and turning away nine approaches from people wanting to hire his cab - before he accepted a group of five women.

Both cabbies, who were caught on Victoria Street, will miss out on two weeks worth of fares as punishment. They both have a right to appeal.

The evidence against the drivers was presented to ataxi licensing panel using CCTV for the first time.

Two other drivers have had their hearings deferred.





The suspensions are part of a wider crackdown. Several other prosecutions are pending following undercover operations by council officers.

In the first case to be heard a driver was convicted of demanding more than the lawful fare and fined £200 and ordered to pay £150 costs.

Cllr Malcolm Kelly, chairman of the Licensing Committee, said: "Cherry-picking is one of the most common complaints we get.

"It is a practice which can affect vulnerable people.

Billy Ellery, of the Knowsley hackney badge holders association, said: "This should've been done a long time ago.

"Cherry-picking can lead to problems with other taxis from different districts going into Liverpool and taking the fares some turn away." Talk Back

Liverpool Cherry pickers, I know what your going to say, Streetcars is talking crap again. But you have to put your self in the position, of the majority of taxi drivers in Liverpool. They don’t own their own cabs. They’re paying an extortionate rent and all the other overheads fuel insurance etc . Private hire from Sefton, Liverpool and even knowsley is squeezing them. There making F.A most days of the week. So come the weekend you have got to do what you have got to do. Perhaps Liverpool council should take a look at its self. and its policy of restricting hackney plate numbers. streetcars

This will make an interesting case if the council only has video evidence to support their charges. All these drivers need to say is that all the fares they refused were going out of the area.

As we all know, a driver does not have to take any fare that finishes outside his licensed area. A good solicitor will get these drivers off.

Regards

JD

None of us are that pleased with short runs, but that is really taking the pee.

_________________
IDFIMH

I must admit its most annoying also when the hacks drive straight past the men on a saturday night that are trying to flag a cab on Royal Parade and then stop for the Women that are some 15 metres or so behind you, Maybe i ought to don a frock in the future, as i see this all too often, however im not going to say though that i wouldn't do it if i was a hack or i would be a liar

_________________
Legal and proud

Loads a love from BERTIE !!

I would rather do 10 short runs, than wait about for 1 big one you can make more, some of the drivers here cherry pick but I don,t give a dam 10 runs at £3.00 a throw is better in my pocket
some of them wont take some of the old folk they are scared that they pee the seats or someone who is [edited by admin]
and JD they even refuse to take a job that does not go outwith the area.
I had an old woman who lives 15 miles away the fare is £18.00 and they would not take her because she smelt, whats wrong with opening the windows a bit oh well there loss my gain

Or perhaps they'll be honest and put their hands up?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

The problem I have is a council using video evidence to try and convict someone without knowing what was actually said between Driver and member of the public. Is there anything to suggest that the people who approached these Cab drivers actually wanted a cab? Even if some did want a cab the drivers weren't obliged to take them if they wanted to go outside the area? Is there anything to suggest that these drivers had their hire lights on? Without knowing the details of the conversations the council hasn't got a cat in hells chance in court.

Who is to say that these members of the public weren't asking for directions, or the cost of a cab to a certain destination? Or just having some banter with the Cabby? I've lost count of the number of times I've been asked for directions and the price of a journey which the member of the public had no desire to take at that particular time. Under this trial by video camera even the most innocent of actions could be construed as cherry Picking.

The method used to trap these drivers is extremely questionable but no matter what anyone thinks about cherry pickers I think we should all take a step back and consider the way these drivers were suspended and what it might mean if the courts don't overturn this ludicrous attempt at enforcement.

Regards

JD

It does make me wonder why we continually read about Liverpool's cherry-picking in the press. The fact is that it is going on across the country all the time.

I do believe, though, that they had a big clampdown on this sort of practice at Liverpool Airport, where it was rife until a year or so ago. Of course it would be untrue to say it's been completely stopped, but I think there is certainly less of this going on.

And personally, I can honestly say that working nights in the city centre I'd rather do a few short runs than wait for one out-of-town job. I think working off the airport would be a different story though.

_________________
Visit TAXIPIX at www.taxipix.fotopic.net

Yes, but my statement presupposed that they are guilty and indeed I was assuming from your claim that a good lawyer would easily get them off that you were assuming likewise but were using the council's lack of compelling evidence to mean that they wouldn't be formally held to account for their misdeeds.

Now if you'd merely said that the council didn't have sufficient evidence to suspend the drivers then I might have agreed, but your implication was that they were guilty but would use the legal process to escape any penalty.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

One of them was filmed waiting for 18 minutes at a peak time and turned away 13 people trying to hire his cab.

The second driver was spotted waiting 12 minutes and turning away nine approaches from people wanting to hire his cab - before he accepted a group of five women.
I think it must be self evident, that these drivers were not on a rank. They could quite easily have been having a break, away from the rank. Drivers in Liverpool are under the impression that Licensing officers are god. In fact Licensing officers think they are god, judge jury and executioner. These two drivers have turned away 22 approaches between them . I find that hard to understand unless they were on a rest . Its strange the way taxi drivers are treated . guilty untill proven guilty , suspended for two weeks , but a bent teacher , copper on full pay till after a full enquiry .

Yes, the circumstances do seem a bit strange, but there are some very strange drivers about.

Of course, we don't know if the CCTV evidence was all that the council had or what the driver's version of events were.

If it was away from a rank and I saw this then I would assume that the driver was waiting for a booking.

And if the drivers were taking a break then why sit in a place where so many people would approach the car - that would be the last kind of place I would choose to have a break, and even if they did think they might get a bit of peace and quiet there then surely it should have twigged by the umpteenth approach that they wouldn't.

And I wouldn't say that they fact that they weren't at a rank necessarily proves their innocence either, since if you wanted to knock back fare like that then the last place you would try it on at would be at a rank.

But without knowing all the facts I suppose we can only speculate.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

I Say let them cherry pick,if people want to pay 60quid to get to speke or crosby from Liverpool let them.It's up to the passengers to tell the cherry pickers to sod off and just wait a little bit longer for a cab

My thoughts were, that they "may well be guilty" of the offence they were suspended but even though they may well be guilty I was disturbed at the way the evidence appears to have been gathered. Without knowing the precise nature of the evidence it is unwise to pass judgement. If the evidence relied solely on video cameras it would be fair to assume that the committee's decision was wrong because the offence of refusing to take a passenger has, as its main ingredient, "verbal refusal". Visual evidence can only be complimentary but without the verbal exchanges the council have nothing whatsoever to base their reasoning?

Obviously we don't know all the facts but my position is one of "innocent until proven guilty" and if video evidence is the only piece of evidence the council has before them, then the drivers in question should be given the benefit of doubt?

Until we know the full extent of the evidence on which this committee based its reasoning we can only speculate on the matter. Perhaps in the future any drivers finding themselves in a similar situation should say nothing until such time it is in their interest to do so.

Regards

JD

Regarding my last post, TDO and JD all this cherry picking goes on while they are on the rank here, That is why it is now time to introduce a law that all punters should go to the first cab on any rank, and that first cab cannot refuse to take them.
Regarding the 2 cabs that where caught on camera that where not on the rank maybe they were booked already and they were waiting for there fare???