The report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The Hearing Panel considered the content of the report and the written and oral representations made by the Licensing Unit officer and SAK.

The Committee heard from SAK’s solicitor who explained SAK had accepted certain parts of the complaint: he accepted was taking passengers to Yorkshire and in the course of journey the weather conditions were poor. He had heard the complainant accuse him of being drunk, tired, and out of control.

SAK said he was not drunk as he is a Muslim. When the police attended there was no suggestion to undertake breath test. The passengers were agitated, and SAK was doing his best to pacify them. For whatever reason the complainants wanted to pullover. SAK stated he was going to take them to the next service station, but they didn’t want him to, so he did as they asked and dropped them on the hard shoulder. SAK did wait hard shoulder for 20 minutes but as they were saying things that were untrue – he got angrier as he was taking cases out of car and putting onto hard shoulder which he accepted was unprofessional.

SAK left the scene, spoke to operator who advised him to return, which he did. He then spoke with the police and co-operated fully, taking the complainants to the next service station where the police then required passengers to pay his fare.

Compensation was also paid by the Operator for damage to their luggage. Half was paid by operator and half by SAK. SAK recognised he didn’t handle it well and should not have left people on hard shoulder. He deeply regretted his actions but believed possibly because they were black, they didn’t understand what a motorway was or the significance of where they were asking to be left. 

The Committee acknowledged this incident happened almost a year previously on 9.12.20. There had been no complaints and no previous complaints. No complaints and never been a complaint. He had been a taxi driver 12 years with no criminal or driving convictions, he had not been subject to any prosecution in relation to the matter. 

The Committee considered full submissions made by SAK’s solicitor along with the three references provided including one from his ward Councillor regarding his financial circumstances. They also viewed the recorded footage of the incident on the hard shoulder.

The Committee were of the opinion that although this was an isolated incident, SAK had abandoned passengers on the hard shoulder of a motorway. The fact he believed they did not understand the significance of where they were, in the opinion of the Committee, placed a greater duty on him to ensure their safety.

Notwithstanding the passage of time or SAK’s unblemished record, the Committee considered SAK’s behaviour to be aggressive and unprofessional and completely unacceptable from a licenced Private Hire driver. They did not accept his account of events and considered the incident of such gravity that revocation was the only option.

Decision

To Revoke the private hire licence under section 61(1)(b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.