Bayat v Director-General, Department of Transport

[2000] NSWADT 19

CITATION:	Bayat -v- Director-General, Department of Transport [2000] NSWADT 19
DIVISION:	General Division
PARTIES:	APPLICANT Masoud Bayat RESPONDENT Director-General, Department of Transport
FILE NUMBER:	993237
HEARING DATES:	14/02/00
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED:	02/14/2000
DATE OF DECISION:	03/03/2000
BEFORE:	Wilson K - Judicial Member
APPLICATION:	Passenger Transport Act - taxi driver - cancellation of authority - Taxi driver - cancellation of authority
MATTER FOR DECISION:	Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED:	Passenger Transport Act 1990
CASES CITED:
REPRESENTATION:	In Person A Wozniak, solicitor,
ORDERS:	1. The Respondent's decision to cancel a taxi-cab authority is affirmed

Background

1 The Applicant, Mr Masoud Bayat was advised on 21 September 1999 that a decision had been made on 20 September to cancel his taxi authority.

2 The decision was taken on the basis of a long list of complaints which had been received against the Applicant over a period commencing in 1994. The other matter that was taken into account was the Applicant’s Traffic Record which was considerable and spreads over a similar period.

3 The Applicant’s Complaints’ Record and his Traffic Record came to attention when he was dealt with in the Downing Centre Local Court on 19 April 1999 for failing to accept a hire. This occurrence happened at Sydney Airport and the processing of the records in relation to this conviction brought to light the Applicant’s Traffic Record and then, on enquiry, his Complaints’ Record.

4 The Tribunal does not need to detail all of the elements of his customer complaint and traffic record history and they are contained in the original Statement of Reasons in this matter. Suffice it to say that the Customer Complaints and the Traffic Record raise serious matters of concern in relation to the Applicant’s capacity to properly carry out the duties of a taxi driver. On the basis of the information contained against him, the taxi company for which he works is no longer able to support his application.

5 At the hearing of this matter the Applicant gave evidence that he had commenced being a taxi driver in unfamiliar circumstances and some of the matters arose from his lack of familiarity with the practice and also with the local traffic regulations. He also attested to the fact that he had personal and financial difficulties and unfortunately recently, his mother had died and this had affected him considerably.

6 The Applicant in essence believes that he is now capable of behaving in an appropriate manner. He concedes that in 1995 he was cautioned and given further training in relation to his responsibilities as a taxi driver.

Issues

7 The Applicant’s taxi authority was cancelled because of his extremely poor record of complaints from customers and also his persistent breaches of the local traffic regulations.

8 The authority was cancelled on the basis that he is not fit to be the driver of a taxi cab.

9 The Tribunal has considered all of the matters that Mr Bayat put to it, in particular, his personal circumstances. However, the fact is that he has a very significant series of complaints registered against him and whilst there are periods both in the Complaints’ Record and the Traffic Record where there appears to be no breach, the Tribunal observes that these periods have largely consisted with the time that Mr Bayat has been out of Australia or during a period in which he was suspended. As a taxi driver he has managed to lose his own motor vehicle licence and this, apart from anything else, indicates to the Tribunal that he does not appreciate the significance of his behavioural approach to driving to be of such significance that he understands the responsibility he has as a taxi driver.

10 It may be that in the future Mr Bayat could, through a process of future learning and training, establish himself to meet the required standards for taxi drivers under the legislation and in accordance with the industry’s standards.

11 However, in this case, the Tribunal is satisfied that the exercise of the decision-making authority to cancel the authority was appropriate. The width and breadth of the complaints against Mr Bayat in the past, together with his long list of traffic offences indicates to the Tribunal that he does not understand what the requirements are for a person to hold such an authority. Accordingly, the Tribunal affirms the original decision to revoke his taxi authority.