Rotherham taxi drivers have licences revoked

[AmourDesign]

Dozens of taxi drivers in Rotherham have had their licences revoked after tougher regulations were introduced in the wake of the town’s abuse scandal.

 

A total of 67 drivers were found to be potentially in breach of new ‘fit and proper person’ tests – with around 70 per cent of this group having their licences revoked after case hearings.

 

A further 171 taxi drivers in the town have had their licences suspended until they complete training sessions on safeguarding children and vulnerable adults.

Should taxi drivers be CBS (CRB) checked?

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/dozens-of-rotherham-taxi-drivers-have-licences-revoked-in-crackdown-1-7796166

[sgtkate]

I honestly thought they were CRB checked already, but you are right, the government's website says that taxi drivers 'may' be DBS or CRB checked, but they do need to pass a fit and proper persons test, but there's no info at all as to what that entails and Google only has secondhand websites and nothing directly from the government...

 

https://www.gov.uk/taxi-driver-licence/outside-london

 

So to answer your question, yes I think they should be checked as they can often be carrying vulnerable people with mental disabilities, the elderly or children without supervision and I think the law should apply fairly to anyone in that situation as a part of their job.

[Stranza]

It doesn't matter anyway.

 

The driver and vehicle rules permit drivers who aren't licenced by Sheff to work here quite legally.

 

So Rotherham can put as many hoops as it likes, if a driver can gain a legal licence in Barnsley without any stringent checks and then legally jump into his cab and pick up in Rotherham it moots the issue.

Plus we all assume they have the necessary checks.

 

Much better to standardise the checks nationwide so we know ANY licenced driver has had them.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Stranza
Locations are just for example.

[sgtkate]

It doesn't matter anyway.

 

The driver and vehicle rules permit drivers who aren't licenced by Sheff to work here quite legally.

 

So Rotherham can put as many hoops as it likes, if a driver can gain a legal licence in Barnsley without any stringent checks and then legally jump into his cab and pick up in Rotherham it moots the issue.

Plus we all assume they have the necessary checks.

 

Much better to standardise the checks nationwide so we know ANY licenced driver has had them.

 

Yes, obviously it would need to be uk wide.

[Ted Heath]

It doesn't matter anyway.

 

The driver and vehicle rules permit drivers who aren't licenced by Sheff to work here quite legally.

 

So Rotherham can put as many hoops as it likes, if a driver can gain a legal licence in Barnsley without any stringent checks and then legally jump into his cab and pick up in Rotherham it moots the issue.

Plus we all assume they have the necessary checks.

 

Much better to standardise the checks nationwide so we know ANY licenced driver has had them.

 

You are absolutely right, there is a precedent for this. Look at the Private Security Act, this prescribes national licensing for Security personnel. Works very well.

[geared]

They'd revoke a bunch more licences if they checked the man behind the wheel was actually the man names on the licence.

[AmourDesign]

I wonder how many of the 171 drivers who have not already taken the test would instantly fail. Or would be of interest to police for various reasons.

[Solomon1]

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/dozens-of-rotherham-taxi-drivers-have-licences-revoked-in-crackdown-1-7796166

 

That is one helluva creepy photo of the commissioner

 

[kidley]

I honestly thought they were CRB checked already, but you are right, the government's website says that taxi drivers 'may' be DBS or CRB checked, but they do need to pass a fit and proper persons test, but there's no info at all as to what that entails and Google only has secondhand websites and nothing directly from the government...

 

https://www.gov.uk/taxi-driver-licence/outside-london

 

So to answer your question, yes I think they should be checked as they can often be carrying vulnerable people with mental disabilities, the elderly or children without supervision and I think the law should apply fairly to anyone in that situation as a part of their job.

 

Whether they are CBR checked or not, a person can still get a taxi licence in Sheffield even though he/she has a criminal record.

 

---------- Post added 15-03-2016 at 20:45 ----------

 

I honestly thought they were CRB checked already, but you are right, the government's website says that taxi drivers 'may' be DBS or CRB checked, but they do need to pass a fit and proper persons test, but there's no info at all as to what that entails and Google only has secondhand websites and nothing directly from the government...

 

https://www.gov.uk/taxi-driver-licence/outside-london

 

So to answer your question, yes I think they should be checked as they can often be carrying vulnerable people with mental disabilities, the elderly or children without supervision and I think the law should apply fairly to anyone in that situation as a part of their job.

 

They'd revoke a bunch more licences if they checked the man behind the wheel was actually the man names on the licence.

 

sgtkate says that is not true, there are NO unlicensed taxi drivers.

[libuse]

I believe that drivers did have a DBS (formerly CRB) check, but RMBC's new test includes looking at soft intel and other performance records. Here's The Times' report on it (apols for massive cut and paste but not everyone can access The Times website.) I find it interesting that former deputy leader Jahangir Akhtar's name has come up yet again. I wonder what the journalist Andrew Norfolk's angle is in relation to picking out that Akhtar has been one of the drivers whose licence has been revoked?

 

Almost 50 Rotherham taxi drivers have been stripped of their licences under new regulations introduced after the town’s sex-grooming scandal.

Among them was the local authority’s former deputy leader, Jahangir Akhtar, who featured in a recent trial at which three of his relatives were convicted of multiple sexual offences against young girls.

Tougher policies for private-hire and taxi drivers were introduced last year after government-appointed commissioners took control of many of the disgraced council’s powers. They include a “fit and proper person” test that takes account of past convictions, complaints and “softer intelligence” linked to child sexual exploitation.

A report revealed this week that an audit of Rotherham’s 1,100 private-hire and taxi drivers identified that 67 of them were potentially not fit to hold a licence. After hearings, 47 drivers had their licences revoked.

The licences of a further 171 drivers were suspended because they had not completed compulsory training sessions on safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. Rotherham council said that a decision was taken 12 months ago that Mr Akhtar’s licence should immediately be revoked. No reason was made public but a council spokesman said that such a decision could only be taken after the receipt of information that “gives rise to significant and serious concerns for risks to public safety if the licence remains in place”.

An independent inquiry by Alexis Jay, triggered by revelations in The Times, found in 2014 that 1,400 Rotherham children fell victim to sex- grooming offences over 16 years. Her report noted frequent past warnings that taxi operators and their drivers played a prominent role in the abuse.

A follow-up inspection of the council, ordered by the government and led by Louise Casey, found that Pakistani-heritage councillors had a disproportionate influence in the council, particularly on issues which affected the Pakistani community “such as the taxi trade”.

Ms Casey reported that some council staff felt intimidated by Mr Akhtar, who “made representations on behalf of drivers to speed up the issue of licences” and “brought pressure” which resulted in proposals for unannounced safety checks of taxis to be abandoned.

She ruled in February last year that Rotherham “has not taken sufficient steps to ensure that only fit and proper persons are permitted to hold a taxi licence” and “cannot provide assurances that the public, including vulnerable people, are safe”.

In a 12-month progress report this week, commissioners who were handed control of the council’s executive responsibilities after the Casey report said that new arrangements had improved the sharing of intelligence on child sexual exploitation between police and the council’s licensing staff.

Mr Akhtar, 55, resigned as council deputy leader in 2013 after The Times revealed his role in a deal under which a violent child abuser to whom he was related, Arshid Hussain, agreed to hand a missing 14-year-girl to police at a petrol station after he received an assurance that he would not be prosecuted.

Hussain, 40, was one of three Rotherham brothers jailed by Sheffield crown court last month for offences against 14 children, including the girl involved in the petrol station handover. Mr Akhtar was unavailable for comment last night.