Taxi Driver Online

Informed yesterday as they are also now part of the defence.
Surprisingly (not really) they have been very lax with their response to my email, they are usually pretty quick, suspect legal are involved as they are potentially implicated and potentially witness also.
Big surprise, why have they not moved against the taxi company already, I would have thought a simple "suspension pending investigation" is warranted. The flip side of that is how can they be allowed to continue to operate under the cloud of suspicion that could result in very serious charges/convictions. Licensing certainly have the power to act, in this case I would have thought they also have a DUTY to act, what about all this safe guarding they keep sprouting nationwide?

Not now pleading guilty, new legal team believe they can get the charges lifted or dropped

I did, and I still have a copy of what was sent November 17 2021. Cover period was good, named drivers etc, policy number, but this was all done electronically on phones and quickly to get me to cover a job in an in emergency. What I received is a photo of one sheet of the policy, not the policy itself.
Combine this with the FACT that it was a council licensed vehicle that would have had things like insurance submitted for scrutiny and you are left with " what the hell else could I have done, wasn't this enough"?
Obviously the answer is no, if the people you pay for your license and expect to protect your interests, are not doing their job

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

They do check, but changes by the policyholder are not notified to the council

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

have you asked the car owner about this?

basically youve been stitched up

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

You really can't make this stuff up.
Local authority have responded to me informing them and my request for any documents they may hold that may assist.
They have furnished me with a copy of the insurance certificate they hold which comes from......
Sheila's Wheel's
I kid you not, incredible.
The certificate does not actually state the type of cover given, but in their defence, the authority said the operator stated that this was the proper insurance for the requirements on the licensing application.
This is real Mickey Mouse stuff if ever I saw it, it begs the question, is our licensing team "fit and proper", or even fit for purpose.
Where do I go next with this one???

I would suggest that you go to all the Councillors on the licensing committee. They are probably not aware of the situation. I would also read the taxi licensing policy and see what is written in there and ask for this to be reviewed. i would also copy the chief executive into all correspondence.

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

Make a formal complaint, then when they send you a wishy-washy reply go to the Local Government Ombudsman.

_________________
IDFIMH

Not sure if anything's really a defence, Chris, rather than mitigation.

It's an absolute offence, like speeding, so you either did it or you didn't, and your intention and knowledge of what's going on doesn't matter. So even if your speedometer is reading incorrectly, you're still guilty of speeding, even though you thought you were doing nothing wrong.

Of course, you could say in mitigation that your speedo indicated that you were within the speed limit, and that might help you keep your licence, say. But that's not a defence to the offence as such, it's merely mitigation as regards the punishment.

As regards the insurance offence, another angle is not to charge in the first place, or to drop the charges, which Sudbury's lawyers are obviously looking at.

As regards Sudbury's fit and proper status as a licence holder, clearly that's a bit different, because it's a quasi-judicial decision, and licensing committees obviously have considerable discretion in that regard, and to that extent it's not a 'strict liability' scenario like the criminal offence of no insurance.

So the fact that Sudbury did all he reasonably could as regards making sure he was insured will self-evidently work in his favour as regards his fit and proper status. Particularly as the reasonableness of his behaviour is in large part due to the fact that the council itself was duped by the insurance situation, and to an extent at least Sudbury relied on the council to vet the licence holder's insurance status.

So it's totes awkward for the council, and to that degee it would be a travesty if Sudbury received any more than a slapped wrist from the council's licensing committee.

But my only advice to Sudbury at this stage would be to not push the council too hard, in case it backfires. But they're obviously on the backfoot and not in a good position as regards their own processes, procedures and conduct.

If it was up to me Sudbury would never have been charged in the first place, but them's the rules, and I think he has plenty of arguments in his favour to mitigate the eventual outcomes in terms of his fit and proper status, if not the offence of no insurance per se.

I think

For anyone to be charged with an offence there must be sufficient evidence for a charge to be laid, but more importantly, in relation to this thread, the charge must be in the public interest.

Definitely a discussion to be had IMO.

_________________
IDFIMH

who is the victim here ?

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

Sudbury.

Also possibly the Local Authority.

The Plead is "Not Guilty".

_________________
Chris The Fish

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdlyi5mc ... re=related

How deep this rabbit hole goes, nobody knows...
Having received the "Shelia's Wheel's" insurance document held by licensing on Friday, It has taken all weekend for the penny to drop as to what is going on.
The document has my name on it
it is the policy document
With my name on it
presumably taken out by me....?????

There are no other names on it, mine and mine alone
I have taken all day talking to the council, the police, Shelias wheels and equifax to see what else has my name on it
A crime ref number has been issued by the police's action fraud unit, the insurers have got their fraud people looking at it, licensing do nothing!

Duty of care? Cab company allowed to continue operating.

Can't make it up

Sudbury is the only victim.

Local Authority is one of the perpretators.

Beginning to look just like that, the Victim..
So I report the fraudulent use of my name to obtain Insurance, I am given a reference number by the police.
The follow up email from the police's Action Fraud states that according to home office guidlines, because I have not suffered a direct actual loss, it cannot be recorded as a crime

WTF

What planet are we living on, because I am dekcuF if I know anymore