This happens relatively often, and has ended up in court once or twice, with the taxi drivers losing.
Here we go again. The punishment for breaking the law like this needs to be tougher.
Looks like it could be another taxi driver looking for a new job. As anyone with a private hire vehicle that refuses to accommodate a guide dog can potentially have their license revoked.
Genuine question – what if a taxi driver is allergic to dogs? Whose medical need is prioritised? I’m allergic to dogs, and therefore would not be able to sit in a car with a dog, if I was a taxi driver would I be legally forced to?
It hasn’t stated if this was the issue in this case, but I know a large issue is that a certain religious faith refuses to tolerate dogs or have anything to do with them.
Could be the case in this issue, I’m unsure.
Regardless though, if a person is using a business they should’nt be penalised due to someone else’s beliefs.
I’d argue the taxi driver is in the wrong job to begin with if they don’t want to help/assist people.
Interestingly, this isn’t just covered by the general (civil) requirements around reasonable adjustments for disablility etc., there is a specific crime defined in the Equality Act 2010 for refusing an assistance dog in a taxi (or trying to charge extra for them)
Unless the cabbie has an exemptions certficate due to their own proven medical issues – they’re bang to rights on this.
My wife had a medical alert dog and we often taxi in London rather than use the tube and black cabs and their drivers are very courteous and don’t mind the dog, but there is also room in the taxi for everyone to fit.
Using local ubers and taxis where they are basically just regular cars has come with much more resistance.
Not just dogs either, even wheelchairs in the back seat etc. (just the frame with the wheels removed).
7 comments
This happens relatively often, and has ended up in court once or twice, with the taxi drivers losing.
Here we go again. The punishment for breaking the law like this needs to be tougher.
Looks like it could be another taxi driver looking for a new job. As anyone with a private hire vehicle that refuses to accommodate a guide dog can potentially have their license revoked.
Genuine question – what if a taxi driver is allergic to dogs? Whose medical need is prioritised? I’m allergic to dogs, and therefore would not be able to sit in a car with a dog, if I was a taxi driver would I be legally forced to?
It hasn’t stated if this was the issue in this case, but I know a large issue is that a certain religious faith refuses to tolerate dogs or have anything to do with them.
Could be the case in this issue, I’m unsure.
Regardless though, if a person is using a business they should’nt be penalised due to someone else’s beliefs.
I’d argue the taxi driver is in the wrong job to begin with if they don’t want to help/assist people.
Interestingly, this isn’t just covered by the general (civil) requirements around reasonable adjustments for disablility etc., there is a specific crime defined in the Equality Act 2010 for refusing an assistance dog in a taxi (or trying to charge extra for them)
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/168
Unless the cabbie has an exemptions certficate due to their own proven medical issues – they’re bang to rights on this.
My wife had a medical alert dog and we often taxi in London rather than use the tube and black cabs and their drivers are very courteous and don’t mind the dog, but there is also room in the taxi for everyone to fit.
Using local ubers and taxis where they are basically just regular cars has come with much more resistance.
Not just dogs either, even wheelchairs in the back seat etc. (just the frame with the wheels removed).