Thursday, August 9

Double Jeopardy

Local taxi drivers are incensed about the jailing of a 61-YEAR-OLD cabbie with a serious lung disease after failing to pay £12,000 owed to the Child Support Agency.
After he was sent to prison for 43 days his wife said “When they took him away he was shaking and I thought he was going to have a heart attack"

Most local drivers take the view that it's an injustice to jail a man for a debt which he fully intended paying off. Let's face it this man was working trying to earn an honest living just like the rest of us drivers. Suffering from emphysema and pleural plaques on his lungs, he could have quite simply claimed sickness benefits instead of working for a living and then the debt would have ended up being paid by the taxpayer. But unlike the ordinary working man we as self employed taxi drivers are punished twice in cases like this. Losing your liberty is bad enough, but added to that the loss of employment that follows and you have a case of double jeopardy. To drive a taxi you must have a police CRB check to prove you are a fit and honest person, and if you are convicted of any offence you must inform the local authorities, who then will no doubt take away your taxi licence. Maybe as some drivers are saying it doesn't make sense to work for a living, one driver remarked to me" if he was a druggie or alcoholic the case wouldn't even have reached court"

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

No one is above the law and it's been applied because the feckless bugger didn't pay for his kid. For 6 years! Then he rocks up at court with a snub offer of £10 a week ? The fact that he's a taxi driver is irrelevant to everyone except taxi drivers. I'm glad he's been made an example of, lets hope the court imposes an attachment of earnings order so that his kid can get what's due to her. No doubt he'll be on benefits as soon as he gets out. There's no excuse for not paying for your child, even if you've split with it's mother.

Bob said...

anon:No it's not irrelevant that he's, or was a Taxi driver. Anyone else would not be punished twice. And of course as I have said once he looses his livelihood how can they impose an attachment of earnings, what bloody earnings? This of course extends the punishment to his present family leaving them without a breadwinner.
The crux of the matter is that outfits like the CSA just don't like self employed folk they make their job harder because they can't make an attachment when the person doesn't get a wage packet.

Anonymous said...

Anyone else would be treated exactly the same. IF the feckless bugger had paid what he was supposed to pay to support his [b]child[/b] the CSA wouldn't have been involved. 3 wives, several kids, 16k of missed support for his own child ? He's a loser (note spelling)and he's finally got his comeuppance. Maybe if he'd made better choices in the past he wouldn't be sat in a cell now ?

Bob said...

anon: You sound like one his luckless ex-wifes. Talk about a woman scorned, you sound very bitter, soo nice of you to point out my spelling mistake, I shall be forever grateful.

Anonymous said...

Well, you never know the previous comments may even have been from one of the poor childrn who never received any help from their father!

Bob said...

anon:Yeh and maybe now they feel a whole lot better now that daddy's in jail eh! But of course the problem still exists, they don't get no money whilst he's in clink.

Anonymous said...

Misplaced loyalty. The only reason his story came to your attention is because he shares a job title with you ! If the bloke was a carpet fitter you wouldn't have given it a second glance. You support those who fail to pay for their offspring simply because they also drive a cab ? Your only defence is to suggest I am one of his bitter ex wives ? Laughable, really.

Anonymous said...

...also .. he's never been 'daddy' has he, the feckless bugger.

Bob said...

anon: Obviously you still don't get the point I have been trying to make all along,the clue is in the title "Double Jeopardy" If he was a carpet fitter he wouldn't be punished twice by prison and then losing his livelihood.

Anonymous said...

YOU are missing the point:

HE should have thought about that BEFORE deciding not to pay up, shouldn't he ?

Self inflicted.

Bob said...

anon: I guess I am flogging a dead horse here, neither of us is going to change opinions any time soon , so lets leave it at that eh!

Anonymous said...

Agreed, I'm right tho, *he should have thought about that a while back* .. Also, Bob, how long would it take to clear £12,000 at £10/week ?

Lets see: £12,000 / £10 = 1200 (weeks
1600 (weeks) / 52 (52 weeks in a year) = 23 YEARS

So, a 61 year old man fully intends to drive a cab for the next 23 years ? Until he's 84 ???

I don't believe that and obviously neither did the magistrate. I believe that he's a deadbeat dad who's tried to pull a fast one on the courts to avoid paying his due to his own offspring. He was probably expecting to go down and hoping that the debt would be written off. Thing is, that might happen with a fine but this isn't a fine so he'll still have to pay via an attachment of earnings order. He will be able to get his cab licence back, mark my words, TPTB will see to it.

I hope more magistrates jail more deadbeat fathers so that the publicly funded (from your and my income tax) CSA gets more publicity and scares absent dads half to death. The lack of a male role model is at the root of most social disorder, absent and non paying fathers ought to be shamed and ashamed and you ought to see the bigger picture.

No double jeopardy here, the prosecution gently rests its case ;-)