Taxi driver False imprisonment

eoin85

Just a question regarding the legal implications of something that happened last night to my girlfriend. She got a taxi on Welford street in Dublin for a 5 minute drive home. The driver started driving in a dangerous manner, one hand on steering wheel going around corners and the like, made my girlfriend very uneasy. She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc. He began cursing at her telling her to shut up. At the end of the journey she paid the fare and said she was going to take a picture of his ID. He immediately took down his ID, saying it was illegal to take a picture of it. and started shouting more abuse at her and frightened her so much that she said that she was going to call the guards. When she did this he drove off with her in the car and refused to let her out. When she got through to the guards and explained what was happenin,the guard, on loudspeaker, demanded that he stop and let my girlfriend out. He refused this order numerous times, lying that my girlfriend had made him drive around for an hour, despite 5.80 cost of fare. my girlfriend started to panick, pleading to be let out. It was only when he got to Harcourt garda station that she was allowed to leave. The gardai on duty at the gate came out and straight away assumed that my girlfriend was in the wrong,asking her three times if she had paid. My girlfriend explained what had happened but the guard didn't care,telling the driver to leave and telling my girlfriend to just get another taxi. Sorry for long winded story but just looking for advice on whether this constitues false imprisonment and if she had a legal right to take a picture of his ID . My girlfriend was extremely shook afterwards as she didn't know wherr he was bringing her.

athtrasna

The transport federation of Ireland have an app called driver check. Put in the taxi plate number and it brings up the driver's id. It's a really important tool as it also lets you send that info to an email address to let people know you're in that cab.

As that has the id I can see no issue in your girlfriend taking a photo of it, her mistake was in telling the driver she was doing so and antagonising him.

Does she have any info about the cab/driver with which to make a complaint?

Stanford

Did your friend actually get either the ID of the driver or the reg no. of the taxi?

The Gardai control the issuing of taxi plates and there is what is known as a Carriage Office in each garda district and a person responsible directly for this function. I suggest you go to the local Garda station where the event occurred and ask to be directed to this person with a view to making a formal complaint.

There is no reason why a passenger cannot take a pic of the drivers ID or request the driver's name and plate no.

Stanford

I should have mentioned that your friend can also make a formal complaint about the driver on the Transport for Ireland website as follows:

http://www.transportforireland.ie/taxi/taxi-compliments-complaints/

However it does sound like its a serious enough matter to make a formal complaint to the Gardai.

eoin85

Her thinking in letting the driver know she was taking a picture was so as to not antagonise him by secretly taking one. In hindsight she wouldn't have done so but didn't think there'd be an issue at the time. Thanks for your response.

eoin85

She has a receipt and the guard on duty checked this against his ID. My girlfriend is going to use this to make a complaint. Thanks for your response.

gizmo555

She should check with the guards if they have an audio recording of the call she made from the cab.

Little CuChulainn

Where is Harcourt Garda station? Harcourt Square is closed and Harcourt Street is not a station. She should verify which station she was at and if she wants to make a complaint go and do it. Gardaí will rarely listen to a complaint from someone who turns up in a taxi during the night and will generally tell them to come back in the morning to make a complaint if they still wish to.

goat2

She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc.

Hard to say who is at fault, seems he had stopped, when she wanted to snap his id, this annoyed him, i would not let anybody take picture of my driving licence or passport, i agree with him there, all she needed was his licence plate number i think,

aaakev

goat2 wrote: »

She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc.

Hard to say who is at fault, seems he had stopped, when she wanted to snap his id, this annoyed him, i would not let anybody take picture of my driving licence or passport, i agree with him there, all she needed was his licence plate number i think,

a psv licence is on display for that exact reason, so the passengers can get the drivers details. Its not his drivers license and he shouldn't have taken it down

Red Kev

goat2 wrote: »

She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc.

Hard to say who is at fault, seems he had stopped, when she wanted to snap his id, this annoyed him, i would not let anybody take picture of my driving licence or passport, i agree with him there, all she needed was his licence plate number i think,

She wasn't asking for a pic of his passport. She wanted a pic of his I.D. that by law the driver is obliged to display on the dashboard. It might be annoying for the driver, but she has a right to take a pic of it if she wants.


Either way, when he failed to stop for her (and indeed for the Garda) the taxi driver was committing an offence.

If she really wants to take this to a higher level and have the driver prosecuted, she's better off talking to her solicitor on Monday and let the solicitor deal with it. The carriage office will probably do very little for her.

She should try to write down (or record on her phone) all her memories of the incident. Get the name (if possible) of the Garda she spoke to on the phone as well as the Garda who was on duty outside Harcourt St.

goat2

aaakev wrote: »

a psv licence is on display for that exact reason, so the passengers can get the drivers details. Its not his drivers license and he shouldn't have taken it down

are you allowed to take a picture of it, or just jot down his psv number,
i dont know the answer to that,

eoin85

goat2 wrote: »

She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc.

Hard to say who is at fault, seems he had stopped, when she wanted to snap his id, this annoyed him, i would not let anybody take picture of my driving licence or passport, i agree with him there, all she needed was his licence plate number i think,

I wouldn't let someone take a picture of my passport or licence either, but this isn't what she wanted to do, she wanted to take a picture of the ID he had on display, as is her right as I have confirmed this. He should not have reacted the way he did, hardly think it was my girlfriends fault that he didn't except that she had this right.

goat2

Red Kev wrote: »

She wasn't asking for a pic of his passport. She wanted a pic of his I.D. that by law the driver is obliged to display on the dashboard. It might be annoying for the driver, but she has a right to take a pic of it if she wants.


Either way, when he failed to stop for her (and indeed for the Garda) the taxi driver was committing an offence.

If she really wants to take this to a higher level and have the driver prosecuted, she's better off talking to her solicitor on Monday and let the solicitor deal with it. The carriage office will probably do very little for her.

She should try to write down (or record on her phone) all her memories of the incident. Get the name (if possible) of the Garda she spoke to on the phone as well as the Garda who was on duty outside Harcourt St.

Thanks for this information, i did not know the law there, and still dont know much about the law, i would have been afraid in her position

Eugene Norman

goat2 wrote: »

She asked him numerous times to use both hands, driver more cautiously etc.

Hard to say who is at fault, seems he had stopped, when she wanted to snap his id, this annoyed him, i would not let anybody take picture of my driving licence or passport, i agree with him there, all she needed was his licence plate number i think,

She has a right to his ID. It has to be visible. Hard to know who is st fault? The driver is.

goat2

Eugene Norman wrote: »

She has a right to his ID. It has to be visible. Hard to know who is st fault? The driver is.

Sorry for my ignorance, thanks for this information, it is good to know.
my apoligies

Little CuChulainn

I'd be interested to know where this right to take a photo of his ID comes from. My understanding is that he is obliged to have it visible but not obliged to allow someone photograph it. I've never heard of this right to take a picture.

TheChizler

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'd be interested to know where this right to take a photo of his ID comes from. My understanding is that he is obliged to have it visible but not obliged to allow someone photograph it. I've never heard of this right to take a picture.

How would he legally prevent them from taking a picture, they're in public, taking their phone could be assault, and the sign is meant to be visible at all times so they can't cover it.

All the information, including the picture, is public anyway so there's no point covering it, unless you don't want to be identified at all.

Little CuChulainn

TheChizler wrote: »

How would he legally prevent them from taking a picture, they're in public, taking their phone could be assault, and the sign is meant to be visible at all times so they can't cover it.

All the information, including the picture, is public anyway so there's no point covering it, unless you don't want to be identified at all.

They are in his taxi. He has the right to set any rules he wants. If the driver says no photography in the taxi then there is no photography. He didn't take her phone he took down his ID.

I can make an educated guess as to what happened. She was unhappy and asked to pull over. He pulled over and she paid the fare. Then she tried to take a photo of his ID and he would not allow her. She then refused to get out of the car even though she claimed she was terrified. So he decided to drive her to a station and let them remove her.

athtrasna

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'd be interested to know where this right to take a photo of his ID comes from. My understanding is that he is obliged to have it visible but not obliged to allow someone photograph it. I've never heard of this right to take a picture.

Putting the psv licence number into the driver check app brings up a copy of his id so it is already in the public domain

Little CuChulainn

athtrasna wrote: »

Putting the psv licence number into the driver check app brings up a copy of his id so it is already in the public domain

Google the Sistine chapel and you can get good images but try taking a photo while standing in the main room. Something being in the public domain has no relevance here. It's his taxi, he can set his own rules for providing a service. Although seeing as how she had already paid she wasn't even a customer any more, just a trespasser in his taxi who refused to get out.

markpb

Little CuChulainn wrote:

It's his taxi, he can set his own rules for providing a service. Although seeing as how she had already paid she wasn't even a customer any more, just a trespasser in his taxi who refused to get out.

That's a funny reading of it. It's not his taxi when he's operating as a PSV - he's state licensed transport operator and, as such, the NTA set the rules, not him.

aaakev

goat2 wrote: »

are you allowed to take a picture of it, or just jot down his psv number,
i dont know the answer to that,

Same thing sure, point remains he shouldn't have taken it down as its meant to be on display at all times

aaakev

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Google the Sistine chapel and you can get good images but try taking a photo while standing in the main room. Something being in the public domain has no relevance here. It's his taxi, he can set his own rules for providing a service. Although seeing as how she had already paid she wasn't even a customer any more, just a trespasser in his taxi who refused to get out.

Thats some reach in fairness

MarkAnthony

OP make the standard complaints and if you feel that strongly about it contact a solicitor if you wish to pursue the matter civilly.

Little CuChulainn

markpb wrote: »

That's a funny reading of it. It's not his taxi when he's operating as a PSV - he's state licensed transport operator and, as such, the NTA set the rules, not him.

It is his taxi. He owns it. He must comply with the rules set out by the State but he can also have his own as long as they are not in contravention of any set by the state or it's bodies.

aaakev wrote: »

Thats some reach in fairness

Which part do you disagree with? Are you going to post some source that you have a right to photograph a taxi drivers ID or are you disputing that a person cannot stay in a taxi when they are no longer a customer if the driver does not want them there?

Mongfinder General

OP, had your girlfriend been drinking?

col.in.Cr

"When she did this he drove off with her in the car and refused to let her out."

If the 999 call supports this I hope he gets sentenced and looses his licence.

Eugene Norman

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'd be interested to know where this right to take a photo of his ID comes from. My understanding is that he is obliged to have it visible but not obliged to allow someone photograph it. I've never heard of this right to take a picture.

Having it visible is designed to allow the customer identify the driver in cases like these. Taking a photo of the ID facilitates that. He hid it which was illegal.

Eugene Norman

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It is his taxi. He owns it. He must comply with the rules set out by the State but he can also have his own as long as they are not in contravention of any set by the state or it's bodies.



Which part do you disagree with? Are you going to post some source that you have a right to photograph a taxi drivers ID or are you disputing that a person cannot stay in a taxi when they are no longer a customer if the driver does not want them there?

I'm pretty sure that right is implicit in the law that states the ID must be on display. It's on display so it can be noted or memorised by the customer. Also I don't think rules can be arbitrarily made up on the spot. If he said no photography on a sign somewhere he may have a right to subsequently stop her. What about if she started to write his ID down, could be then invent a rule opposing writing in his cab?

Fairly odd defences here. If the op's story is true this sounds criminal to me. They would have the police recordings.

stefanovich

Insane. I'd pursue this. Totally unacceptable and criminal behaviour by the driver.

Little CuChulainn

Eugene Norman wrote: »

Having it visible is designed to allow the customer identify the driver in cases like these. Taking a photo of the ID facilitates that. He hid it which was illegal.

I disagree. He had it on display as was required. Nothing says he has to allow someone to take a picture of it. He only took it down to prevent this.

Eugene Norman wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that right is implicit in the law that states the ID must be on display. It's on display so it can be noted or memorised by the customer. Also I don't think rules can be arbitrarily made up on the spot. If he said no photography on a sign somewhere he may have a right to subsequently stop her. What about if she started to write his ID down, could be then invent a rule opposing writing in his cab?

Fairly odd defences here. If the op's story is true this sounds criminal to me. They would have the police recordings.

I can't see where this implicit right to photograph an ID is. I would argue that photographing an official ID is completely unacceptable unless specifically provided for by law (such as money laundering operations) or volunteered (such as car insurance applications). The ID is there so the customer can be sure that the person driving is licenced, not so it can be memorised.

I don't even think he needed to invent a rule, he could have just told her to get out. She was no longer a customer. She got her lift and paid he fare. What happens after you pay your fare in a taxi? You get out and let them go on. She could have taken a photo of his plate or registration number.

The only reason I'm defending the driver is because I think the ops story is not true. If a person truly was being shouted at and abused in a taxi and was terrified surely they would get out of the taxi. The ops girlfriend did not do this which leads me to believe that what she actually did was refuse to get out unless he allowed her to photograph the ID and he eventually got so pissed off he drove her to a Garda station to allow them to remove her.

stefanovich

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I disagree. He had it on display as was required. Nothing says he has to allow someone to take a picture of it. He only took it down to prevent this.



I can't see where this implicit right to photograph an ID is. I would argue that photographing an official ID is completely unacceptable unless specifically provided for by law (such as money laundering operations) or volunteered (such as car insurance applications). The ID is there so the customer can be sure that the person driving is licenced, not so it can be memorised.

I don't even think he needed to invent a rule, he could have just told her to get out. She was no longer a customer. She got her lift and paid he fare. What happens after you pay your fare in a taxi? You get out and let them go on. She could have taken a photo of his plate or registration number.

The only reason I'm defending the driver is because I think the ops story is not true. If a person truly was being shouted at and abused in a taxi and was terrified surely they would get out of the taxi. The ops girlfriend did not do this which leads me to believe that what she actually did was refuse to get out unless he allowed her to photograph the ID and he eventually got so pissed off he drove her to a Garda station to allow them to remove her.

Why are you defending this asshole?

Little CuChulainn

stefanovich wrote: »

Why are you defending this asshole?

Eh..

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The only reason I'm defending the driver is because I think the ops story is not true.

markpb

Little CuChulainn wrote:

I can't see where this implicit right to photograph an ID is. I would argue that photographing an official ID is completely unacceptable unless specifically provided for by law

I'd counter that by saying that everything is legal unless there's a law (or precedent set by a court of record) making it illegal. You can do anything you like in this country unless the state says you can't. What law makes it illegal to photograph a PSV license?

FWIW I think there's more to this story too. The only plausible explanation I can think of for the driver acting the way that was described is that he panicked, overreacted and was driving to the nearest garda station.

Little CuChulainn

markpb wrote: »

I'd counter that by saying that everything is legal unless there's a law (or precedent set by a court of record) making it illegal. You can do anything you like in this country unless the state says you can't. What law makes it illegal to photograph a PSV license?

There is no law against it, but I'm not suggesting that she broke a law like others are about the cab drive not allowing her too. As far as I'm concerned neither of them broke the law by trying to photograph the ID or not allowing it to be photographed. Others are suggesting she has some right to do it and the taxi man has some obligation to allow her. Where I think she went wrong was refusing to get out of the taxi after she had paid her fare and been told to get out.

aaakev

The driver is required to give the customer his details, if she writes them down or takes a picture is irrelevant and he must have his licence on display all the time. From reading the psv manual its actually a fixed charge offence of €60 for him not to display it.

Grolschevik

Little CuChulainn wrote:

Where I think she went wrong was refusing to get out of the taxi after she had paid her fare and been told to get out.

You're inventing your own version of what happened. This is not what the OP said happened. Fair enough, you think there's more to the story than has been told, but you don't get to make up your own alternate version and then repeat it as established fact.

If you don't take posters' stories at face value, I think you're in the wrong place...

RainyDay

Mongfinder General wrote: »

OP, had your girlfriend been drinking?

Yeah, that's the important thing. And was she wearing a short skirt?

Little CuChulainn

Grolschevik wrote: »

You're inventing your own version of what happened. This is not what the OP said happened. Fair enough, you think there's more to the story than has been told, but you don't get to make up your own alternate version and then repeat it as established fact.

If you don't take posters' stories at face value, I think you're in the wrong place...

Why do you think that?

Grolschevik

Little CuChulainn wrote:

Why do you think that?

Because what people post is all we have to go on, whether it be facts or hypotheticals. Once we start inventing alternative stories, we're into fiction. We have to take OPs at face value, because the stated story sets the terms of the thought experiment, or logic problem, or debate. Stepping outside those terms in speculation could lead anywhere.

esforum

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'd be interested to know where this right to take a photo of his ID comes from. My understanding is that he is obliged to have it visible but not obliged to allow someone photograph it. I've never heard of this right to take a picture.

What right has he got to refuse you to photograph it? He doesnt have to assist you but it must be clearly visible at all times, by removing it he breached that code.

I have 2 thoughts on this. the first one may be unpopular but its only a small part.

A, Most people drive with one hand, I would consider complaining about that too be pretty petty. If you are unhappy with the driver, get out instead of arguying.

B, The driver lost the plot in a serious manner. What he did was a criminal act and NEEDS to be reported so it can be followed up. People that behave like that have no place driving a PSV and needs to be weeded out. Make a formal complaint, for ease and efficiency make the complaint at the station that covers the start of the journey, thats where it will end up being investigated anyway however who was it that she rang and was on loud speaker? Was it 999 and the Gardai at the control room? If so, there should have been some form of follow up recorded on the incident. Those records dont last forever so dont delay the report.

That all being said, Gardai get more complaints than they can investigate. Please dont report the incident unless you are willing to follow it through to its conclusion which may possible be a court case.

fullstop

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

They are in his taxi. He has the right to set any rules he wants. If the driver says no photography in the taxi then there is no photography. He didn't take her phone he took down his ID.

I can see it now...taxi driver is gasping for a fag, sparks one up and says "sorry love, my taxi my rules". You're a gas man.

Little CuChulainn

Grolschevik wrote: »

Because what people post is all we have to go on, whether it be facts or hypotheticals. Once we start inventing alternative stories, we're into fiction. We have to take OPs at face value, because the stated story sets the terms of the thought experiment, or logic problem, or debate. Stepping outside those terms in speculation could lead anywhere.

Yes, it could even lead to a discussion on issues that are not specific to the op. Heaven forbid. You are aware this isn't legal advice forum right?

esforum wrote: »

What right has he got to refuse you to photograph it? He doesnt have to assist you but it must be clearly visible at all times, by removing it he breached that code.

I'd argue that he does not have to allow it be photographed. And the regulations state it must be visible to passengers. She was no longer a passenger.

Grolschevik

Little CuChulainn wrote:

Yes, it could even lead to a discussion on issues that are not specific to the op. Heaven forbid. You are aware this isn't legal advice forum right?

Not sure what your point is. I'm talking about discussion forums in general, not just this one. I'll try to explain what I mean again.

Ok. Once we start to speculate beyond the boundaries of the original post, something like the following could happen.

Compare:

1. "We're not hearing the full story here. It seems obvious to me that the OP's girlfriend is a foreigner with a gripe against Irish driving."

2. "We're not hearing the full story here. It seems obvious to me that the taxi driver is a foreigner with a gripe against Irish women."

Both equally possible extrapolations as your "she refused to get out" one.

Little CuChulainn

Grolschevik wrote: »

Not sure what your point is. I'm talking about discussion forums in general, not just this one. I'll try to explain what I mean again.

Ok. Once we start to speculate beyond the boundaries of the original post, something like the following could happen.

Compare:

1. "We're not hearing the full story here. It seems obvious to me that the OP's girlfriend is a foreigner with a gripe against Irish driving."

2. "We're not hearing the full story here. It seems obvious to me that the taxi driver is a foreigner with a gripe against Irish women."

Both equally possible extrapolations as your "she refused to get out" one.

That's the part you have the issue with? I would think it was obvious she refused to get out. She had paid the fare and was still in the taxi. Seems only obvious she refused to get out, otherwise she would have been out of it and not in a position to be driven anywhere.

Grolschevik

You stated she refused to get out after being asked to. Pure invention. Also, people routinely and annoyingly can take several minutes to gather their things before exiting and after paying. Are they also "trespassing"?

All the poster said was that she said to the driver that she was going to take a photo of his card. We have no idea of the timeline. Could have been seconds.

My problem isn't that you state your belief that there's more to the story, it's with the specifics of what you believe must have happened. Anyway, looks like you're trying to skew the conversation away from my original point.

MarkAnthony

Regardless of who's in the right or wrong in relation to photographing the ID - I personally find the suggestion you can't photograph the ID to be nonsense but putting that aside; you've a quite possibly a customer with drink on board and, what is supposed to be a professional service provider.

It's up to the professional to de escalate a situation. Was he left with no option but to driver her to the station, possibly. Did he create the situation by refusing to let the passenger do something that was quite reasonable if they felt they had a legitimate gripe, absolutely. I'm fully able to believe there were two idiots involved here, the difference is one is meant to be a professional. That professional will want to seriously think about whether this is the job for them if they react like this to being wound up by a customer.

Todd Gack

One thing I don't get is why the driver drove to the Garda station if he was apparently so much in the wrong. Seems a rather odd thing to do.

MarkAnthony

Todd Gack wrote: »

One thing I don't get is why the driver drove to the Garda station if he was apparently so much in the wrong. Seems a rather odd thing to do.

I've personal experience of an extremely rude Dublin bus driver refusing to move the bus after he was cheeky to me and I retorted in kind, I actually thought he was joking, resulting in the guards being called. He's lucky I didn't want to hold people up as s imislar incident resulted in a five figure settlement and rightly so. As they're the sober ones (I hasten to add I was also, not so sure about the OP) and deal fairly frequently with the guards, unfortunately - customers are idiots, they're well aware where the benefit of doubt is going to fall.

micks

Todd Gack wrote: »

One thing I don't get is why the driver drove to the Garda station if he was apparently so much in the wrong. Seems a rather odd thing to do.

I know of several instances of taxi's driving to Garda Stations and the Garda backing the taxi, with the onus being on the passenger/customer to prove they're in the right