Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to not allow my DD in the taxi with this man?

308 replies

mickeyvsminnie · 04/04/2012 20:29

My DD is 13. We live very rurally and the council provide a taxi for her and several other village children due to our distance from the school. I suppose it's the country equivalent of a school bus!

Anyway, she is in year 8 so has been going in the taxi for almost two years now. There is one driver - I shall call him 'Dave,' who does some of the journeys, along with Paul and Marie - the owners of the taxi company [ the council contract out the job ].... Dave does around 50% of the journeys.

My DD has mentioned several times to me in the past that he is a 'bit weird ' and she 'feels uncomfortable ' when in the taxi on her own with him [ this happens sometimes due to other drop off/illness of other kids etc] but I brushed it off until a few weeks ago.

She was off school for a day or two with a stomach bug. She returned to school and was alone in the taxi with Dave on her first day back. He asked her if she was feeling better, she replied ' yes thank you.' He then said ' was it your periods that you were off with? ' and she was obviously mortified. He then went on to talk about my DDs friend , referring to her as the 'under developed ' girl and ' I bet she hasn't started her periods yet .. ' My DD said he often talks about 'girl things' like this.

So, I call the council and tell them that i feel this is highly inappropriate for any man, let alone a taxi driver in his 50s with the job of driving young girls to and from school. They take it seriously, speak to Paul, the owner of the company and Dave is spoken to. 'Yes,' he says, he did indeed speak to DD about her periods but he thought this was entirely normal and he is puzzled as to why it is not appropriate. the council call me to advise they will look into further but they will remove Dave from the runs. I reiterate that I do NOT think he is a padophile - more that he is crass, highly inappropriate and stupid. I then think that this is the end of it.

Anyway, the council call me again today. They wish to reinstate Dave to driving the kids again. He will have 'additional training' and they will ensure that DD is not alone with him [ they cannot ensure this - what happens if a child is ill, for example? ' ]

I am unhappy with this. My DD would not want to be in a taxi with him - far to mortified and uncomfortable.

So- WWYD? AIBU to insist that he is NOT to drive the children to school, that this is a possible warning sign that should be heeded?

TIA!

OP posts:
bigbluebus · 05/04/2012 12:29

OP. I think you are being very sensible and level headed about this and giving the LA an oportunity to explain themselves regarding their decision. However, I agree with everyone else - the end result must be that this man does not ever take your daughter to/from school again - and preferrably no one elses daughter either.
I have had a number of dealings with LA transport dept over the last 15 yrs as I have a DD with SEN who has school transport. On one occassion my then 3 yo DD with SEN went "missing" on the way home from nursery with a supply male driver who did not answer his mobile phone and no escort in the car. Turned out he had been given the incorrect address for DD. On another occassion DD who is epileptic had been put with a supply escort who had not been given any info about my DD (even though I had consented for medical info to be shared with escorts/drivers). But the LA thought that was all OK as their 'bank escorts' go on a training course - not a training course in my DD's complex needs however!!!The apparent lack of common sense amongst some of the LA's employees in this dept has always astounded me. On many occassions I have asked them "would you put a child of yours in this situation?" The answer of course is usually "No". But you often have to spell the obvious issues out to them and I think there are some good examples from posters on here that you can use.

Shelby2010 · 05/04/2012 12:31

I think you should discuss this with the police. Presumably they have officers experienced in child protection who are more qualified to assess the situation than the council. As mentioned previously this man needs to on their radar. You are able to protect you daughter from this man, but if he is dangerous then other young girls also need protection.

EldritchCleavage · 05/04/2012 12:34

My mother used to do a job with a chld protection element and from what she has told me, one of the most important aspects of the modern safeguarding regime is referring things like this to the appropriate investigators, whether police or social services. An in-house fob-off (such as your council appears to be engaged in) is Absolutely Not On. Very odd, so do speak to police. You don't have to 'accuse' him of any propensity or intention, just report what he has actually been saying to your DD.

MY DH had the 'testing the waters' experience with his Scout Leader, whom he realises with the benefit of grown-up hindsight was a pretty worrying chap. Fortunately, being the gobby class clown seems to have had one important benefit-he failed the test.

I can't think of why any adult man would initiate a conversation with even an adult woman about her periods/body shape without realising he was being inappropriate or on dodgy ground, and that the girls were mortified. He must enjoy making the girls uncomfortable.

Riversidegirl · 05/04/2012 12:56

Should he need further training? Can you teach common sense? These seedy remarks were made by someone who doesn't seem to have age appropriate social skills. AVOID.

It's a wonder he passed his driving test!

Floggingmolly · 05/04/2012 12:57

Actually Shelby, that's a very good point.

Noqontrol · 05/04/2012 13:00

The thing is you just don't know whether he just made a silly mistake or is actually grooming. Abusers generally start off this way, testing the water so to speak. Parents have often said 'after the event' that the perpetrator just seemed a bit naive and they never expected any more than that, and that's exactly what you are wanted to think. People can be very cunning. The thing is, as you don't know either way then it's better to be safe than sorry. Your dd might be ok but imagine how horrifying it would be to pick up the newspaper in years to come and read about him with regard to someone else's child. It may seem a bit OTT to go to the police, but at the end of the day it's better to be safe than sorry when it's too late.

ohmeohmy · 05/04/2012 13:38

This man should not been transporting children, ever. I think unless you get a firm commitment from the council by using the safeguarding guidelines, ofsted etc as advised up thread then go to the police. He needs to be watched.

ohmeohmy · 05/04/2012 13:38

be transporting

Smellslikecatspee · 05/04/2012 13:53

I?ve tried for 10 minute trying to write something that makes sense.
I?m another that agrees you need to take this further.

But what I?ve been trying to say is that your actions will reinforce to your daughter that she was right to feel uncomfortable/ trust her instincts. We?re so busy telling kids to be polite etc especially girls, to be nice to be polite all of which is important, that sometimes we encourage them to ignore their ?spidey? senses

I hope you understand what I?m trying to say and good luck

ThreadWatcher · 05/04/2012 13:58

I also think yanbu and wouldnt want my dd to get into a car with 'Dave'.

margoandjerry · 05/04/2012 14:02

smellslikecatspee that is such a good point.

I had one of those sadly all too common dodgy "uncle" episodes as a 9 or 10 year old. And what stopped me from saying anything was fear of being rude to an adult.

And OP, I feel like getting on the phone to the police in your behalf. This is fully dodgy - and I don't say that sort of thing lightly.

TheNightIsDarkAndFullOfTerrors · 05/04/2012 14:02

"Further training" Hmm

Please continue to stand up for your DD.

She matters. Her feelings matter.

If ANYONE has to change their behaviour or actions, it is not your daughter.

mirry2 · 05/04/2012 14:05

I know this isn't the answer but I assume hes had an enhanced criminal records check?

Pandemoniaa · 05/04/2012 15:00

He will have had an enhanced crb check but as others have said, this will only show up convictions/cautions. It will not reveal his habit of having inappropriate conversations with teenage passengers unless this has come to the attention of the police in the past and some sort of action taken.

oldmum42 · 05/04/2012 15:29

Please listen to your instincts, and your daughters instincts. This is not normal behaviour - "Dave" is exhibiting typical grooming behaviour towards your daughter (and likely the other kids he's transporting).

If he is not a predatory paedophile, he is behaving very much like one, and your daughter should not be pressured into accepting that behaviour as "normal"...... which is surely the message she will be getting if "Dave" starts driving her to school again.

CBR checks mean nothing - only that the person HAS NOT BEEN CAUGHT. Too many people think someone MUST be safe/trustworthy just because they are CBR checked, and then ignore warning signs.

Of course "Dave" was going to tell his employers that he thought it was normal to talk to children about periods and sexual development (he was comp airing your daughters development with one of the other girls), he was not likely to front up and say he was grooming her, was he?

I think there is more than enough cause for concern to say this man should be brought to the attention of police, he should not be driving school transport.

TheNightIsDarkAndFullOfTerrors · 05/04/2012 15:42

My fourteen year old abuser (I was thirteen) did not have a CRB check. I am now forty years old and just starting to come to terms with what happened.

Please let your DD know that she should be listened to.

SamanthaBrick · 05/04/2012 15:48

Thank you for all your comments. No further call from the council as of yet - so I shall call them next Wednesday I think... I want this sorted and wrapped up before she returns to school the following Monday.

I stand by my feeling that police involvement is overkill - although I understand why people are saying that. My main concern at the moment is that he no longer does these school runs and an absolute guarantee from the council that he will not be reinstated. I have never said that I wanted him to lose his job, I merely said to them that he must not be in a position of driving children to and from school as he obviously has no grasp of what is and isn't acceptable conversation. If the council cannot enforce this - well, further action will have to be taken.

i have downplayed it to my DD anyway. She told me, I listened and said I would sort it and he wouldn't be collecting her anymore and that still stands. If he turns up She won't be getting in the taxi with him and if he collects then she can call me from her mobile and I will collect her. She is a very well adjusted sensible child anyway so she has not been affected by any of this - she merely felt mortified and uncomfortable [ though that's bad enough I suppose! ]

StillSquiffy · 05/04/2012 15:57

Why not let the police decide whether or not it would be overkill to investigate this? They have more experience than you and can advise appropriately. I am sure they are busy enough to to take it further only if they are very good reasons to do so...

Proudnscary · 05/04/2012 16:05

Another one saying no way would I want my dd to be in a taxi with this guy.

'Dave' has to go.

SamanthaBrick · 05/04/2012 16:10

I don't want to call the police, I'd like to put my faith in the council , although the jury is currently out as to whether this faith is misplaced! He holds an enhanced CRB check - I assume this still stands. And he hasn't committed an offence as far as things stand. Creepy and inappropriate sums it up from where I am standing. I don't wish to up any stakes and I don't want my daughter interviewed. I'm aware of the extent of the comments and feel that the best action is for the council to remove him from the driving. Whether they will or not remains to be seen...

margoandjerry · 05/04/2012 16:12

your call obviously. But I had forgotten until your post that when I was ten I got what turned out to be an obscene phone call from a man pretending to do a survey about whether girls had started my periods yet. We got into a long conversation about it and he wanted names of other girls at school who had/hadn't. In my naivety I didn't realise it was dodgy until it went dodgy at the end. So I would strongly suspect grooming here.

Hope you get some decent help on this from the relevant authorities. I am shocked at their attitude so far.

twoistwiceasfun · 05/04/2012 16:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

porcamiseria · 05/04/2012 16:17

margo, me too! I was only very yound and it was wierd as fuck

I think thats why so many of us see RED FLAG, we have experienced similar

LadyClariceCannockMonty · 05/04/2012 16:20

I wouldn't go to the police either at this stage, but I don't think there's any harm in telling the council that you will not hesitate to go to the police if the matter isn't resolved to your satisfaction.

Sounds as though you're handling it very well and calmly, OP. Good luck in getting it sorted.

oldmum42 · 05/04/2012 16:41

OP, there is a good reason to involve the police (and let them decide what should be done), and that's for the possible protection of other children from this man. Your daughter will be safe as you say she won't be going in a taxi with him again, but what about the other children he is driving around - he may already be abusing, or may abuse in the future. Given his behaviour, I think the police knowing the name and address of this man is a good idea, even if he is investigated and nothing inappropriate found. I think, given his behaviour towards your daughter, the police may want to have a chat with the other children.
I think the council have behaved wrongly by not involving the police. If they just remove him from the job, without referring him to the authorities, then he will be free to apply for other jobs working with children and will still have a clean CRB check, and you can bet his references from the taxi company won't mention a thing about "the incident".

And, if the police decide he is grooming children, an offence HAS been committed already!