Dual taxi licence revoked after hit-and-run, littering and police allegations emerge
A Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver in Stockton-on-Tees has had his licence revoked following a General Licensing Committee (GLC) hearing. The committee unanimously determined that the driver was no longer a fit and proper person to hold such a licence, citing a series of incidents that raised significant concerns over public safety and professional conduct.
The committee’s decision was based on evidence relating to three complaints against the driver, his conduct during investigations, and a history of past infractions that suggested a pattern of non-compliance and poor judgement. The driver’s licence was revoked with immediate effect under section 61(2b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.
The GLC hearing, which was attended by the driver and his legal representative, heard evidence related to three separate complaints. These complaints painted a troubling picture of the driver’s behaviour and his ability to meet the expectations placed on taxi and private hire professionals.
A member of the public reported a collision on 2 April 2024 involving a private hire vehicle. The driver of the vehicle allegedly fled the scene. CCTV footage from a nearby shop showed the incident, and the operator identified the vehicle as belonging to the driver. Initially, the driver denied involvement, claiming he was at home asleep during the time of the incident. However, during an interview with licensing officers, his account shifted. He eventually admitted vague recollection of the event but denied causing the collision or any damage to his vehicle.
Later, he claimed that his son, who did not hold a valid licence, had taken the car without his knowledge. The committee expressed doubt about the credibility of this account, noting inconsistencies in his statements and a failure to report this crucial information to licensing officers in a timely manner.
A second complaint was lodged by a member of the public who accused the driver of throwing litter out of his vehicle. When the witness challenged him, he allegedly followed her to her home, reversed his vehicle outside her property, and took photographs of her house. The witness, who was accompanied by her child, described the behaviour as intimidating.
The driver admitted the littering incident but claimed the items unintentionally left the vehicle when he removed air fresheners from the rear-view mirror. He also admitted to taking the photographs but could not adequately explain his actions. The committee found his behaviour deeply troubling, particularly given the witness’s credible and composed account of events.
In a third incident, CCTV footage from Cleveland Police showed the driver’s private hire vehicle involved in a suspected drug-related offence. The car was reportedly driven at police officers and then onto a footpath to evade capture. The driver claimed he was not behind the wheel at the time and again blamed his son for unlawfully taking the vehicle. However, council checks cast doubt on whether his son resided with him, as claimed.
The GLC reviewed past infractions dating back to 2004, including written warnings for overcharging, using a mobile phone while driving, and shoplifting. The driver’s licence had previously been revoked in 2020 due to medical concerns but was reinstated in 2023.
In their decision, the committee noted that the driver had been repeatedly warned about his conduct over the years but had failed to demonstrate meaningful improvement. The cumulative impact of past warnings, combined with the three recent complaints, convinced members that revocation was necessary.
The committee’s primary concern that brought their decision was public safety. The GLC concluded that the driver’s repeated lapses in judgement, inconsistent explanations, and inability to secure his licenced vehicle from unauthorised use by his son made him unsuitable to hold a licence. The council’s Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Licensing Policy emphasises that drivers must be honest, professional, and capable of safeguarding the public.
The committee also referenced legal precedent, quoting Lord Bingham’s statement in McCool v Rushcliffe Borough Council (1998):
“The licensing regime is intended… to ensure so far as possible that those licensed to drive private hire vehicles are suitable persons to do so, namely that they are safe drivers… honest and not persons who would take advantage of their employment to abuse or assault passengers.”
Based on the evidence presented, the committee unanimously resolved to revoke the driver’s licence with immediate effect, stating that the privilege of holding such a licence had been undermined.
