Taxi Driver Online

UK cab trade debate and advice
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 6:45 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2022 4:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:06 pm
Posts: 24116
Location: Twixt Heaven and Hell, but nearest Hell
heathcote wrote:

Sudbury is the only victim.

Local Authority is one of the perpretators.


He is a victim, but the base is the perpetrator , not the LA, they were supplied with a valid H&R policy, maybe when asking which area we work in Insurers should notify the LA of any change in the cover?

The LA's cant check the policy every day on ever car/every policy can they

Has Sudbury exposed this base as uninsured? Facebook/Twitter/press would love it, has the base had its PH ops licence and vehicle licences removed?

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2022 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13815
Wanna wrote:
He is a victim, but the base is the perpetrator , not the LA, they were supplied with a valid H&R policy...

Er, but were they?

Sudbury says the policy supplied was social and domestic, and in HIS name :-o

Of course, the local authority can't check absolutely everything, but here it prima facie failed to do even the most basic of compliance checks.

But which in turn illustrates why it's all so messy and drawn out. To be fair to the authorities, and while not doubting Sudbury's version of events, if the policy was fraudulently taken out in his name, then hardly a suprise that police and the council might think he's complicit.

So at best neglect and incompetence from the local authority, and no doubt embarked on a damage limitation exercise as regards their own conduct [-X


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2022 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:51 am
Posts: 49
This last week has been one of discovery.
I am extremely p1ssed that it looks exactly as described, authorities are too embarrassed to act following their own failings, meanwhile I am out of pocket at every turn. Just had my own insurance renewal, these outstanding issues are the excuse behind a £500 hike in my policy premiums.
The company still operates although they have a new operator on the license. Even that looks dubious, as the name on it is "untraceable", a ghost perhaps?

My Lawyers are confident of being able to get the charges dropped. They have advised me to wait until they have been before I act, but I am sorely tempted to hand this over to the press, let them investigate when I get these charges dismissed, find out how deep this goes and highlight the failings of the authorities.
I am that p1ssed that I want to see heads roll, people held to account and this business shut down.

Should I go to the press or not?

Who would take a story like this?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2022 2:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13815
Yes, it's a difficult one, because often it's all about the interests of the council, and the 'optics' of it, and how it would be viewed by voters if it all got into the public domain.

So you could kick up a stink, but it could misfire if it's just yesterday's fish and chips wrapper as far as public opinion is concerned, and then the council might be looking to take revenge :?

Which is how I view a lot of stuff locally, and it would be a whole lot different if I didn't have to continue to work in the trade, but if I didn't have to work in the trade then I'd maybe then think, what's the point?

Of course, that's the cynical view, and that's not to say everyone in officialdom is that petty and vindictive.

But there are obviously basic compliance check failures by the council here (I mean, you'd surely check if an insurance policy was for H&R rather than SDP, and that it was in the proprietor's name), and to that extent it's totes awkward for them from a PR perspective.

Which is probably influencing how they're approaching it all, and why it's taking so long. Which may in turn be why they haven't acted against the proprietor yet.

And, of course, as well as having reasonable grounds for thinking that you're complicit because of the name on the insurance policy, no doubt police, the insurers and some in the council will have have grounds to think that some people in licensing will have conspired with the proprietor :-o

Of course, it could simply be down to simple compliance failures, but no doubt the authorities will have to investigate all possible avenues.

You will know the ground better than us on here, but I'd wait a few days yet before going to the press, or whatever. In particular, it might be better to wait until it's confirmed whether or not the charges against you will be pressed, and what action is to be taken against the proprietor.

I'm sure it will all come out in the wash eventually, but I'd take your lawyer's advice and hold fire at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2022 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
Quote:
Should I go to the press or not?

I would follow the advice from the lawyers, it's what you are paying them for.

The press will still be there when this matter is eventually sorted.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2022 12:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:51 am
Posts: 49
As advised, I am waiting the lawyers and seeing these charges dropped.

All the correspondence between myself and licensing over this issue, I have copied in the CEO of the council.

I am highly suspicious that the "new" Operator is a ghost and is really the same guy. I figure it will take investigative journalism to expose these things and put them out on display.

As for public reaction, lets not forget, I WAS ON A SCHOOL RUN. We were running around peoples kids with insurance that wouldn't cover. That doesn't get forgotten quickly


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2022 7:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 11:27 pm
Posts: 19639
Sudbury wrote:

As for public reaction, lets not forget, I WAS ON A SCHOOL RUN. We were running around peoples kids with insurance that wouldn't cover. That doesn't get forgotten quickly

Actually 3rd parties would still be covered.

_________________
Grandad,
To support my charity text MAYORWALK to 70085 to donate £5


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Sat Jul 23, 2022 4:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13815
Sudbury wrote:
I am highly suspicious that the "new" Operator is a ghost and is really the same guy. I figure it will take investigative journalism to expose these things and put them out on display.

But presumably the council should have sufficient investigative powers to see through stuff like that? And, after all, it's not as if a change in operator in these circumstances won't be waving a massive red flag at them 8-[

Of course, the press may be better able than us to unearth such stuff, but on the other hand the local press is increasingly under-resourced, and the nationals prefer to spend time on Partygate and the like.

Again, I would wait until the dust settles a bit before escalating things as far as the public domain is concerned.

I mean, even if there was some sort of complicity between the operator and licensing, it's unlikely to have involved any more than a handful of people, so no doubt police, senior council officials and councillors will be trying to work out precisely what's being going on, and who's complicit, and whether it's just neglect and incompetence rather than bad faith from officialdom.

Moreover, it can't all just be swept under the carpet and forgotten about, and the council has to take some sort of formal action against the (former?) operator, at the very least.

Pretty sure it'll all come out in the wash eventually, but these things take time, and maybe best to take a cautious approach in the meantime :-$


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Fri Aug 19, 2022 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 11:17 pm
Posts: 2609
You may of course go to the press but they would be unwise to publish the story as there is a court case pending.

Did you have any knowledge of contacting Shiela's Wheels? Phone records, email trail etc. I'm sure SW will have a trace of the transactions. My opinion is that you were under the impression that your employer covered you on a company policy. Until this event you'd never thought to ask to see the policy. You therefore have a very good defence to the charge of driving without valid insurance. The purpose of the journey may have been "going to pick up passengers". That is part of the journey of actually picking up passengers. I found this out the hard way in 1973, taking an empty bus to pick up passengers. It was deemed that the empty journey was part of the contract to pick up passengers. A more recent case was First Group, using office staff to drive empty buses from London to Manchester for rail replacement. did they need tachographs? No, despite the distance and drivers hours, they were going to a railway emergency and that was the final purpose of the journey.

Whoever employed you or shared the car is responsible for insuring it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:51 am
Posts: 49
Vindicated.
Charges dropped, no further action as of 10th October.

So how do I sue this arse when he is a foreign national who has fled the country yet still pulls the strings of this cab company through proxies?
7


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13815
Result :D =D>

Not sure precisely what legal action *you* could take against the perpetrator, particularly if he's fled the scene of the crime 8-[

So unless anyone else on here knows any better, you'd maybe be best taking formal legal advice, if you haven't already. A lawyer should at least be able to tell you pretty quickly whether it's worth pursuing any kind of action.

And presumably the council and police etc are taking some kind of action against him, or is all that a bit academic now if he's fled the country?

And, of course, there's the council's part in all of this to be examined, assuming it hasn't all been swept under the carpet?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2022 6:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 7:30 pm
Posts: 53921
Location: 1066 Country
Delighted the police has seen sense, or maybe the CPS lawyer has read through the papers and is still laughing on the floor.

I think you have got some redress from the council that licensed the vehicle as a taxi without taxi insurance if indeed they did.

The council also need to prosecute the owner for fraud, and/or not being a fit and proper proprietor.

_________________
IDFIMH


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2022 6:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:51 am
Posts: 49
Interesting journey of discovery and a lesson to one and all.
So I had one lawyer suggest I plead guilty and plead for leniency in sentencing. Possible outcome, IN10 on license but escape any form of fine type penalty. That would have been deemed "best result" for this course of action, resulting in years of grief with licensing and insurers, not to mention the additional costs!

Other lawyer (more expensive), wanted to attack the charges at source and at every stage upto and including a court appearance. This lawyer was adamant from the outset that they could get the charges against me dropped as a point of law in the road traffic act, something the first lawyer seemed to be oblivious too!

An interesting comparison, a £500 lawyer against a £2100 one.
You get what you pay for is as true in law as everywhere else.

Case closed


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 6:33 am
Posts: 13815
Interesting.

Of course, the law is as messy as the likes of politics - full of different opinions, inconsistencies and hypocrisies. It's not just different lawyers who have different approaches and attitudes to this kind of thing - it also applies to police, prosecutors and those on the bench :-o

And, of course, with licensing councillors and their quasi-judicial function, we have a self-evident example for those in the trade of people who often substitute their own opinions for the law, and are acting as judge and jury over something about which their knowledge is distinctly limited [-(

And, of course, to a big degree the whole legal system is geared towards the better off, particularly if you want to challenge public bodies with deep pockets in the civil courts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: No Insurance
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2022 3:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:26 pm
Posts: 8518
Sudbury wrote:
Interesting journey of discovery and a lesson to one and all.
So I had one lawyer suggest I plead guilty and plead for leniency in sentencing. Possible outcome, IN10 on license but escape any form of fine type penalty. That would have been deemed "best result" for this course of action, resulting in years of grief with licensing and insurers, not to mention the additional costs!

Other lawyer (more expensive), wanted to attack the charges at source and at every stage upto and including a court appearance. This lawyer was adamant from the outset that they could get the charges against me dropped as a point of law in the road traffic act, something the first lawyer seemed to be oblivious too!

An interesting comparison, a £500 lawyer against a £2100 one.
You get what you pay for is as true in law as everywhere else.

Case closed

\:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/ \:D/

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 64 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