Taxi Driver Online

No shortage of reading here, but I'm guessing the worse-case-scenarios make it all sound a lot worse than it actually is. Kind of makes it sound like the very long delays are just due to admin deficiencies, but I suspect they're actually problematic applications and renewals, thus take a long time to go through the system.

The stand out case comes at the end, and it's a bit of a whopper. Looks like the driver was caught out in a plying for hire sting, but he makes it sound like he's been hard done by and it's cost him barrowloads of cash, and to that extent it's all consistent with the rest of the article in that everything's the fault of the council...


Bristol’s cabbies are being put out of work by council licensing delays and mixups

https://thebristolcable.org/2023/11/bri ... ng-delays/

Private hire and Hackney carriage drivers have had enough of the city’s licensing department, with some waiting needlessly for months for permits to be renewed before they can get back on the road.

Festus Kudehinbu, who has been a taxi driver in Bristol for almost three decades, was out of work for three months last winter because of delays with the renewal of his taxi licence.

The 64-year-old, who lives in St Agnes, is one of several taxi drivers we have spoken to recently who have been affected by issues with Bristol City Council’s taxi licence application process. The delays have put drivers’ livelihoods on hold for weeks or months.

“It meant I didn’t have income – I was worried I wouldn’t be able to pay for heating,” Festus tells the Cable. “It really affected my nervous system, it gets you down, into depression… I am worried it will happen again.”

According to data released to us under freedom of information (FOI) laws, taxi drivers in the city are waiting far longer for licence renewals than the local authority’s target 10-day processing time.

Festus’s is up for renewal again this month. To make sure he does all the paperwork correctly he’s asked a friend who’s “better with technology” to help him with his application.

The application process is entirely online, and Festus says people struggling with technical issues are met with a wall of silence because the support phone line is usually busy, and staff unhelpful.

He says he was not sure of the nature of the delay last time round, and that it hadn’t been explained to him.

“Some [people] don’t know how to do things online,” he says, adding that taxi drivers used to rely on a face-to-face application service in Bedminster, which was shut down during the pandemic and never reopened.

“I struggled with the technology, and when I called [the council] to ask for help, I did not get a response,” Festus says.

Long wait times

Bristol City Council receives about 1,200 taxi driver licence applications a year and works to a target processing timeline of 10 working days.

But the average time it takes to grant these applications since 2020, according to data released following the Cable’s FOI request, was 36 days. This average waiting time peaked in late 2022 at 46 days, although this has since improved.

Some drivers have had to wait much longer though. The longest wait for a licence to be granted this year so far has been 251 days. Last year the longest wait was 502 days, and in 2020 a driver was granted a licence after waiting a marathon 1,127 days.

The data shows the council is consistently missing its own target of processing applications within 10 working days. A spokesperson said that in “some cases” it takes longer, and that they understood taxi drivers’ frustration.

The spokesperson added that, as part of the council’s work to improve the process, outreach workers have been trained to assist drivers who are unable to complete the forms online, and new staff hired.

“We are also setting up in-person drop-in sessions,” the spokesperson said, without giving a timeline for when these might be launched, or if they will be held at the licensing headquarters in Temple Street.

‘I would probably still be waiting’

The issues, however, are not just down to drivers’ misfiling their paperwork. It’s clear that complications with applications on the part of the council are also causing people grief.

Farrukh Raja drives a Hackney carriage taxi – the blue cabs that can use taxi ranks. He’s been a cab driver in Bristol for more than 40 years. Issues with his paperwork last year meant he was out of work for two months.

The 66-year-old father, who lives in Fishponds with his wife and three children, says that about 18 months ago he was rushed to hospital suffering a suspected stroke.

“I was all right, but this meant under the law I could not get my licence renewed for a year, which I understand and is fine,” he tells the Cable, adding that the problems began when he reapplied in March 2023.

“I filed all the paperwork on time, but I just didn’t hear from them,” Farrukh says. “Every day that went by I was hoping it would be granted, but no. I just waited and waited – and would probably still be waiting.”

He says that a few weeks after his drivers licence expired, he received a letter from the council saying he would be required to undergo medical examinations before it could declare him fit to drive.

Private hire car and Hackney carriage drivers must separately keep up to date their taxi driver’s licence and vehicle licence, and ensure their registration plates are renewed.

“I took the letter [to the doctor] and he answered it straight away. He said he had already confirmed in [a previous] medical form that I am fit to drive my taxi, and he confirmed it again in his reply.”

Farrukh said he did not hear from the council after this. He waited until May before he took matters into his own hands, by contacting his local councillor to ask for help with the situation.

He says Ellie King, Labour councillor for Hillfields and cabinet member for public health and communities, asked the authority to review the application and that it was then granted that same day.

“It must have taken about 15 minutes, and this thing, for two months I was without a licence, nobody listening,” says Farrukh. “This is my livelihood, they don’t know what they are doing.”

Like Festus, Farrukh fears he’ll have problems next time his licence is up for renewal and that following the delays to granting his application this time round, he’s had no apology or explanation from the council.

He says it’s not uncommon for drivers to have similar issues, which he hears about regularly on a WhatsApp group he’s on with other cabbies.

“One applied for a Hackney carriage licence, like I did, and the licence he received was one to serve alcohol,” he says. “That’s the kind of incompetence that happens in [the licensing] office.”

Farrukh says that not only was he out of work for months, meaning his finances took a hit, but that he paid for a full year’s drivers licence and the one he received was for six months. He’s not been offered a refund.

‘Stealing drivers’ livelihoods away’

Joshua Mannah, 55, says that in December last year complications with getting his licence renewed by the council meant he was unable to work for a week.

“I tried calling and calling, trying to get it sorted, but there is nobody there to communicate with,” Joshua says.

The 55-year-old says other drivers have stopped trying and got a licence with South Gloucestershire Council, where he says the process is far smoother.

“[The process] needs to be fixed,” Joshua says. “And it won’t be, if nobody is taking ownership or responsibility for the problem.”

Joshua also told the Cable how during the pandemic he was the victim of a “cruel” sting operation by the police, in which an officer played on his good character to trick him into illegally picking him up without a booking.

Seth Seglah, vice-chair of the IWGB United Private Hire Drivers, said: “With bills to pay and families to support, no one can afford to lose their wages for weeks or sometimes months at a time.

“Lengthy and costly licence renewals are snatching drivers’ livelihoods away from beneath their feet, wrecking their finances and ruining their mental health. We need a more humane, more efficient licence renewal system that prioritises drivers’ needs and rules out waiting times.”

...however, later found this detailed article about the plying for hire sting, which is worth a read.

This one's a real rabbit hole, and requires careful reading (and link to the council minutes at the bottom).


Cab driver says good character used against him in ‘cruel sting operation’

https://thebristolcable.org/2023/11/tax ... i-license/

Police have questions to answer after private-hire taxi driver’s claims of a stitch-up that’s had years-long financial consequences.

Parked in his cab near Southmead Hospital, taxi driver Joshua Mannah is startled when a man raps on his window and hurriedly explains that he needs a lift home, so his child isn’t left alone too long.

Despite Joshua emphasising that it’s illegal for him to pick up passengers who haven’t pre-booked, recognising the man’s desperation, he says, eventually he agrees to take him.

Along the way, Joshua says, he’s pulled over by police, and slapped with six points on his licence for driving a vehicle uninsured against third party risks. The whole thing is a stitch-up.

While he admits what he did was illegal, he says it was “unfair and cruel” for a plainclothes police officer to use tactics that played on his good character. And the so-called “sting” has had lasting financial consequences.

The 55-year-old dad, who lives in Fishponds with his wife and 12-year-old daughter and has driven cabs in Bristol for about 25 years, had a clean record before the incident, which he calls a “complete one-off”.

It happened in July 2020, when Covid restrictions meant cabbies were struggling. And the penalty, Joshua says, meant he couldn’t work for some companies operating in the city.

“My debts have just mounted [as a result],” Joshua tells the Cable. He says he’s lost as much as £700 a month in income, and been unable to keep up with mortgage repayments. Three years on, he’s demanding answers from the police.

Financial hardship

Avon and Somerset Police works with Bristol City Council to check private hire drivers are picking up passengers legally. One method it uses is ‘test purchasing’ – where undercover officers ask for a lift without a booking.

A spokesperson for the force said the rules around these practices are strict and procedures are in place to protect drivers’ rights, adding: “Officers are not allowed to encourage, mislead or persuade drivers to take them.”

The police did not comment on Joshua’s claims other than to say that according to bodycam footage of him speaking to an officer after being pulled over, the taxi driver did not explain he had been encouraged by the ‘passenger’.

The moment Joshua picked up the undercover officer was not filmed, the spokesperson added, because the person involved did not have a “direct surveillance order” allowing them to film Joshua unknowingly.

According to minutes of a Bristol City Council public safety and protection sub-committee meeting in which Joshua’s case was heard, the driver told officers his passenger was a “friend” – before admitting that this was untrue.

No mention is made of Joshua’s claim that he was encouraged by the undercover officer with a story about his need to get home to his child, but Joshua says the hearing was “20 minutes” and he was unaware he could appeal.

The incident happened after three months of lockdown. Joshua had been off the road due to Covid restrictions, the council meeting in August 2020 heard, causing him and his family “financial hardship”.

He was overdue on car payments and had to take a mortgage holiday, councillors were told. This, Joshua says, might have been why they “took pity” and did not suspend his taxi licence for six months as they could have.

“I didn’t deny I took him,” Joshua tells the Cable, audibly upset after explaining that he’s still feeling the financial impact of the decision. “I said it was a one-off, that I was compelled to do it on humanitarian grounds.”

‘Something has to change’

To add insult to injury, Joshua says that in December 2022 complications getting his taxi licence renewed by Bristol City Council meant he was unable to work for a week.

“I tried calling and calling, trying to get it sorted, but there is nobody there to communicate with,” Joshua says. “On the phone most of the time it’s an automated voice. Everything is mostly over email or online.”

He says other drivers he knows have been out of work for weeks, even months, due to delays with their licences being renewed in recent years. Some, he adds, have stopped trying and got a taxi licence with South Gloucestershire Council, where he says the process is far smoother.

“You’re left in suspense, not knowing if you’re going to get your badge or plates renewed,” Joshua says. “[The process] needs to be fixed, and it won’t if nobody is taking ownership or responsibility for the problem.”

A spokesperson for the council said the authority is working to improve the processing time by hiring and training temporary staff.

https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=21646

The author of the piece obviously not taking sides here





Funny that he's been doing the job for 25 years and has never sinned before. I mean, he's surely had other people with similar sob stories during that time


All companies, presumably. He's either badged or he isn't.

Actually, forget my last point. Didn't quite latch on to the fact that (and correct me if I'm wrong) he was only ever off the road for a week, and that was because of the renewal delay two years after the plying for hire sting and committee hearing. He was never as much as suspended.

So he was presumably fined, and maybe has to pay higher insurance. And maybe some companies in Bristol do shun drivers caught plying for hire (although I doubt most are that fussy, particularly as his record seems to be otherwise unblemished).

But the article makes it sound like it's all a lot worse than that, as if he was off the road for months on end or even a year or more because of it all.

Other things I don't understand:

- Why do the council minutes say he was done for two plying for hire offences?

- Why don't the council minutes say it was test-purchase by an LO? The minutes say he was 'approached by a member of the public'.

The council minutes also fail to mention the entrapment claim, but it looks like the driver didn't actually claim entrapment at the time, and he's only raised that now. Why wait well over two years?

Technically every person in the world is a member of the public

But maybe two incidents one a complaint by a member of the great unwashed and one a test puchase by an LO ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

That's really not the way these things happen.

If he really was such a person of good character he would have said, 'no problem I will book a car via my data unit'.

_________________
IDFIMH

It should never have got to such a state, and shame on the council for letting it get in such a mess.

_________________
IDFIMH

Maybe one for plying, and the other for unlicensed hiring.

_________________
IDFIMH

Because they are f***ing useless.

_________________
IDFIMH

The minutes actually say this:

"JM has committed two offences of plying for hire..."

Which seems quite clear. However, the fuller sentence actually reads:

"JM has committed two offences of plying for hire and having no insurance..."

So I'd guess the two offennces refer to the plying for hire, and the no insurance.

Therefore in my opinion it's just badly expressed in the minutes, which make it sound like there's two specific plying for hire offences. Maybe a better way to put it would have been (by adding a comma and a few extra words):

"JM has committed two offences, one of plying for hire and one of having no insurance..."

Another vaguely similar thing I noticed, but didn't mention earlier because didn't think it was of much importance, was this:

"Therefore three offences were committed: plying for hire, not displaying an ID badge and driving without insurance."

Don't think the ID badge thing is an offence as such, therefore...

In fact, after the later mention of the two offences, as dissected above, the minutes say:

"JM was also not wearing his badge which is a breach of conditions attached to the PHD licence."

So the minutes seem contradictory in claiming the ID badge thing was a specific offence, but later states is just a breach on conditions.

But I'm sure the scrutinising councillors were totally on top of all these holes and inconsistencies