Dave Wolpin has been operating his Driver Dave’s airport taxi illegally for three years, including for a year after he was formally noticed that he was operating illegally, but Wolpin is hoping the Utility and Review Board will ignore his past transgressions and give him a proper licence to operate.
Driver Dave’s was the subject of a UARB licensing hearing Tuesday. In preparation, Wolpin asked his customers for support, and received about 60 emails from students who he or one of his employees had driven to the airport. Another 750 people signed a petition in his support.
“I was expecting this many responses,” said Wolpin, while testifying under oath at the hearing. “But, I was actually really surprised by how many students had really specific stories.”
In their emails, some customers wrote of their appreciation for the times Wolpin had called them early in the morning to tell them their flights have been delayed. Others said that because Wolpin’s drivers are also students or recent graduates, the student customers could talk with the drivers, creating a sense of security.
Wolpin began running trips to the airport for students, mostly from within the King’s and Dalhousie community, back in 2009. He began with just his own car, but now he’s got one five-seater car, as well as a 14-seater.
But Wolpin only incorporated Driver Dave’s two years ago. That’s also when he received a commercial vehicle licence. Problem is, under the terms of that licence Driver Dave’s is only allowed to deliver customers picked up within the limits of HRM to destinations outside HRM. The airport is within HRM, so Wolpin was violating his licence.
Wolpin was notified of his violation of the law on February 27, 2012, in an email from the Natalie Aisthorpe, the director of the Motor Carrier Division of the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal. “This information is consistent with all prior communication (i.e. during your initial application process and subsequent fleet expansion),” wrote Aisthorpe. Wolpin ignored that notice and kept running his airport business anyway. Only on September 18, 2012 did Wolpin apply for a specific licence to carry customers to the airport, but driver logs and an inspection report included in the hearing file show that Driver Dave’s continued to operate, without the licence, up to last week. (See the UARB documents referenced in this article here.)
On the stand at the hearing, Wolpin was asked how he could be trusted with another licence if he has been knowingly doing something illegal.
In response, Wolpin argued he had an obligation to his clients who appreciated low-cost and easy-to-access business.
But Wolpin never told those clients the shuttle service was operating illegally. He told the hearing board Tuesday it wouldn’t have mattered to most of them, even if he had.
“It doesn’t concern me,” concurs Brianna Gilmour when informed by The Coast that Wolpin’s business has been operating illegally. “I felt safe every time I rode with them.” Gilmore is in her fourth year at Dalhousie University and has been catching rides to the airport with Driver Dave’s since her first year. Gilmore says taking a taxi to the airport would have been too costly.
“It’s such a hassle to have to get down to the bus stop,” echoes Shannah Rastin, another fourth-year Dalhousie student. “After you’ve hauled your luggage down, you aren’t even guaranteed that it will be on time.”
Wolpin’s application for a licence is opposed by several taxi and limousine companies that operate to the airport.
The UARB will likely issue a ruling in coming weeks.
This article appears in Jan 24-30, 2013.
He appears to be using a similar appeal to that which the illegal U-Vint operators have recently tried. I do wonder about this sort of thing, because of the very point the UARB made: what is the point of allowing them to operate within the law if they have already showed they do not respect it? It also sends a chilling message to those who are charged with enforcement if the govt will not support them in their duties. While these extra-legal operations may be popular with some segment of the public, laws exist for a reason.
Legal or illegal, I would take Driver Dave to the airport any day; and I think most other students who have used his service would too- whether he’s licensed or not isn’t our concern, cost is, and a taxi costs an unreasonable amount of money for a service that (having used both to get to the airport) is inferior. A cab doesn’t track your flight for you and pick you up accordingly, but DD does, and for less than half the cost. Maybe if taking a taxi wasn’t such a rip-off, cab companies wouldn’t have a reason to worry about the competition. Boycott Cabs for airport rides.
I am one of the students who has taken driver dave many times. The service is very much hit or miss. I have had quick and pleasant rides to the airport, and I have had trips that were long and hellish due to bad service. It isn’t uncommon for his employees to drive and text, which is in itself illegal. Also I have had them tell me that they will be taking me straight to the airport, and then take over an hour driving around waiting and picking people up. Either way, running a business illegally is in my opinion completely wrong.
What was left out was that when Driver Dave’s applied for a license in the first place, he told them what he wanted to do. They told him a CV license was the license he needed, so he applied for it and got it. A year later, he was told that he had the wrong license, but by that time had thousands of customers and several employees. To follow the law would have been to lay off employees and deny customers the service. Which is the right thing to do? Sometimes a system is broken and it takes entrepreneurs, those who fuel our economy, to change it. What he needs to do is to put pressure on our law-makers to fix the system. Unlike other provinces, NS has a heavily regulated transportation industry, which is one way of ensuring safety and quality for the public. Driver Dave’s safety history is impecable and while they will never please every customer, but if they were granted a license to have more vehicles, it would make it much easier to provide a better service (in response to john1212). The NS trucking industry used to be regulated, but a few entrepreneurs changed it because it failed.
And Driver Dave’s is continuing to operate, but using other companies vehicles until they can find another solution.
Yes laws exist for a reason Bo Gus – usually, here, to support and enforce a government monopoly…
Yes cabs and airport car services DO monitor your flights. It’s part of offering good airport service. More importantly regulations ate they for good reason. Ensuring a pedophile or rapist is not driving your daughter for one. Ensuring passengers and belongings are insured with commercial insurance in the event of an accident is another good reason.
The laws and by laws in the HRM for taxi and Limo service are archaic with the demands of the travelling public today they need to be updated and the zones open since the council does not not even know where the boundary lines are to further complicate matters they put up signage in places like beaverbank that clearly says BEAVERBANK HALIFAX or Dartmouth HALIFAX and more like Councillor McKluskey said before leaving where the HELL am I. If the council wants to get up with the times stop the money grab and politics and open the zones for the public never mind mouthy cab drivers who only think of the fare not the passenger this is now 2017 Halifax needs to get up with the times council stop being dictatorial and give the public some freedom of movement stop controlling the people