Posted on the 27th May 2026 in PHTM News

BRADFORD PRIVATE HIRE BOSS FINED AFTER BLAMING SOFTWARE ISSUE FOR UNLICENSED DRIVER

The boss of a private hire company has been ordered to pay nearly £1,000 after claiming a computer glitch caused him to employ a driver without a valid private hire licence.

Imran Khan, 43, the operator of Aireside Private Hire, failed to attend his scheduled hearing at Bradford Magistrates Court on 22 May.

The case was subsequently proven in his absence, revealing that one of his drivers, Khalid Bashir, continued working for several weeks after his licence had expired.

The issue came to light late last year when Bradford Council officials blocked Mr Bashir's licence renewal after discovering an undeclared offence on his record. Imran Hussain, prosecuting on behalf of the council, explained: “While doing a check as part of the renewal process, officers noticed an offence from January 2023 that had not been declared by Mr Bashir.”

With the renewal halted, Mr Bashir was left without a licence, yet an investigation revealed he kept working from October 7 to November 9.

“An investigation found that Mr Bashir carried on operating as a private hire driver, even though he had no licence to do so," Mr Hussain said. "That led to an investigation into the operator, who was asked to give reasons as to why they allowed a driver to work for them despite his licence having expired.”

When questioned by council officers, Khan blamed technology for the oversight. Mr Hussain stated: “He told officers that a mistake had occurred – at the time Aireside Private Hire was undergoing a software update, and this was the reason the expired licence hadn’t been picked up.”

However, the prosecution argued that Khan had already been explicitly warned about the upcoming expiration date. “The taxi company were already aware of this – despite this software explanation," Mr Hussain told the court.

"The defendant still knew and still had a responsibility to ensure the licence had been updated.”

Magistrates found Khan guilty in his absence. He was fined £220, ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £88, and landed with the council's full legal costs of £600, bringing his total financial penalty to £908.


Read another story