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

[mickeyvsminnie]

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!

'And he hasn't committed an offence as far as things stand.'

Grooming IS an offence and has been for some time now.

agree, what about the iother kids? here is definition:

Grooming is when a person tries to ?set up? and ?prepare? another person to be the victim of sexual abuse. Although not all sexual-abuse is preceded by grooming, it is a very common and deceitful process, which can be used by strangers or by those known to the victim. The method can take quite a while (even months and years), and can be very subtle and sneaky. Victims of grooming often do not realise that they are being manipulated until after they have been sexually abused, and even then, some victims do not see how the grooming led to their abuse.

In the offline world, groomers use many techniques to prepare their victims, such as;
◦giving inappropriate attention to children,
◦giving gifts,
◦manipulating a child through threats or coercion
◦openly or accidentally exposing the victim to nudity and sexual material
◦sexualising physical contact, such as inappropriate tickling and wrestling,
◦having an inappropriate and intrusive interest into children?s physical and sexual development,
◦having inappropriate social boundaries (e.g., telling the potential victims about their own personal problems etc).

OK, if this creepy fucking nonce man does have some kind of SN so that he doesn't have a clear understanding of appropriate boundaries in conversation he shouldn't be driving children around in his car.

Because even if he doesn't actually assault them or plan to assault them and is just missing a few of his higher cognitive functions or whatever, this behaviour is frightening, upsetting and humiliating and girls' feelings MATTER. The council needn't fire him, but they should switch him to driving boxes and crates and stuff around, rather than people.

Though I don't actually believe that this is the case, no matter what he might claim. He's either a sexual predator grooming DC for a physical assault, or what he feeds off is their misery and fear and embarrassment.

Absolutely, Solidgold

If you are reluctant to go to the police OP, could you at least tell the council that if they insist on allowing him to drive the other children you will be taking things further and reporting the matter to the police and to the local newspaper. That might be enough to shock them into proper action.

To reiterate- no going to the police. Complete over reaction I feel - although I can understand posters pov. I just don't share it based on what my dd has told me and what I personally feel is right to do in the circumstances. And I'm not convinced re the grooming, have to say. She has been in a taxi with him for almost two years. He must be the worlds slowest groomer, that's for sure.

Anyway, now I am aware of the situation I shall deal with it in a calm but forthright manner. It's good to know that you all feel similar to me in that it's not right- as opposed to the council who seem to think he can be trained and reinstated

Sorry to have missed all the thread so far. Just wanted to say that my Council not only CRB checks all drivers but insists that all children in taxis are accompanied by escorts. The escorts wear brightly coloured tabards and ID and are easily identifiable as LA escorts.

I thought this was routine.

Line- possibly with little ones? Seems a bit overkill with hulking teenagers but I'm reviewing this pov now! I have a little boy in reception- he could get a taxi too due to our location. I've vetoed this, funnily enough

Haven't read all, but your post about him being the worlds slowest groomer could be that she wasn't developed enough for him until now:(

Yes, even with the teenagers!

Some of the teenagers are being taken to specialised provisions, such as contact centres, and therapy, and do need to be escorted.

The escorting system also protects the taxi drivers, too.

Actually, I checked with my loacl taxi firm and they won't take children on their own anyway - until they are 13 they must have an adult with them.

The escorts tend to do the same hours as lollypop people, so it is a job suited to the same demographic.

That's what I thought too boobear

Thinking about this some more....

Any truly decent man who'd genuinely made a stupid mistake by asking your DD about her periods - maybe he had a close relationship with his own daughter and felt that men should be open about these things - would be utterly MORTIFIED that he'd made your DD uncomfortable.

And, if it was put to him that it would be better if he didn't drive her anymore, would no doubt agree wholeheartedly because he would want to avoid the SLIGHTEST question mark hanging over him.

So the fact that he's not in any way apologetic and even seems to want to drive her again suggests that he's still testing the waters here and trying to brazen it out and make everyone else doubt whether they're overreacting.

Which incidentally OP, is what you profess you don't want to do. Just a thought.

Also, if I was the mother of the other girl referred to as 'undeveloped', I would be absolutely furious if I found out that you hadn't informed the police or at the very least, the other parents. This other girl needs to be protected to and her parents should be informed how this man is referring to her.

Op, won't you be speaking to any of the other children's parents? Surely you must see that there is a potential risk to those children too?

What Wine and Roses said-- especially, and if only DD's friend's parents- he was refering to her, so they have every right to know.

Rhinestone, I agree with everything you say in your first two paragraphs. To suggest that he's 'trying to brazen it out' and that the OP might be playing into his hands, though, is not very helpful, and also a bit alarmist and sensationalist, I think.

He may well just have some sort of issues or condition that means he can't understand appropriateness and boundaries. I do think he ought to be taken off child-driving duties, but would proceed with caution before jumping to conclusions about his intentions.

The other girl now attends another school so she is quite safe! I do not know her parents and will not be taking further action there. Not because I don't care but because I'm not about to start ramping things up. I have no idea of his intentions- my main concern is that the council deal with it effectively ( still to be seen ) and that I deal with it effectively. I'm happy in myself that I've done so.

The council will be receiving a call from me next week and I will ask for clarification as to what has been decided. If dave is still going to be driving- I shall take matters further and won't stop until dave is not driving.

All school taxis and minibuses run by our council have a female escort or female driver. Seems to make sense.

Ladyclarice - very easy in these cases to be alarmist and sensationalist. My instinct is that he is a twat and stupid. Of course I don't know this but , as long as I've protected my child and ascertained that he is removed from the run, I've done my 'job' I feel - I'm. It about to start pondering on whether he is a predatory pedophile when I feel he probably is not. My dd has been in a taxi with him for almost two years - nothing has happened- and she has not changed physically all that much since year 7 so I'm quite sure he is not waiti for her to be more 'developed.'

Plus these talks are not a weekly or even monthly occurrence - he has made these remarks on at least three occasions - she is quite sure he is not 'engineering' sex type talks. She is a clever, sensible girl and my conclusion - from listening to her - is that he is deeply inappropriate but not leading up to anything

I'd be demanding that the council address this as a safeguarding issue. Have they referred it to their own safeguarding team? Could easily be left hand (transport) not thinking of the right hand (children's services).

I'd also raise it with the school - their designated person for dealing with safeguarding should be aware and may be able to knock some sense into the council.

NO way he should be allowed anywhere near vulnerable people, children or adults.

Clawdy, why does that make sense?

This man either knows exactly what he's doing and is doing so intentionally or he has severe problems. Let's face it, in this day and age, grown men (and women) are so scared of being accused of innapropriate behaviour they won't even cuddle a distressed child.

Either way, something needs to be done and I agree with others that informing the police is not accusing him of anything. They have the experience to decide how to handle the matter.

Just out of interest, why has this other girl moved school?

we should always always listen to our children and ourselves when we feel something is not right, our gut feelings are very rarely wrong, and if they are what harm has been caused by avoiding someone. she is too young to understand what is not right here and now it has become obvious and i hope you take this further he should not be doing the job he does

he may not have been grooming her as such but he has an unhealthy interest in her development which is not right whatever his intentions are he should not be making young women feel uncomfortable and vulnerable

I haven't been able to read all of the posts but just wanted to say that we had a similar situation with inappropriate play with a 'dinner-man' at dd's school. It involved being blid-folded and 'feeling' the other person til you could guess who it was. the game was in the playground and instigated by the children. it was fed to me piece-meal and I was horrified!
I didn't call the police but made sure that the school were aware and also that they were aware that i was prepared to pursue it further were I not happy with the action they took.
The man was a father of similarly aged children and sadly was lacking in training as to how to protect himself from mis-interpretation. I like you did not think he was a peaodo or a danger but was concerned that my dd might learn that this sort of play with grown men, touching etc was ok?
My dd is still only 9 and so no period issues yet, but would be MORTIFIED if she was in your dd' position.
YANBU Even if it is the case that this man is comfortable around teen girls because of his family life for example and has these conversations openly, You don't want your dd to learn that it is acceptable for her to be placed in uncomfortable positions by a man in power?
Why are there no escorts??
I think this is a policy matter as opposed to a police matter, just my opinion.
I think you have done the right thing so far, what do you plan to do now?

Clawdy, my council advertises for taxi escorts (and will employ and train, regardless of gender).

I'm glad your council has taxi escorts, too. I believe that men and women are eligible for these jobs, subject to checks and training.

I think this is general policy across the country.

OP's DD would have been 11 when she first started getting a taxi to school. I am surprised that a taxi firm let alone a LA would agree to this, unless the child/ren were accompanied.

Just the insurance implications for the LA are staggering, let alone the safeguarding ones, and the implications for the drivers.

Unless his taxi driver's licence is revoked he will still be able to drive a taxi and that fact that he's been taken off a school contract may not stop him going and doing the same job somewhere else.

The LEA may not necessarily be the Council that issue taxi driver licences (he has to be licensed to drive on a school contract), if you live in a two tier area (i.e have both a county and borough/district council) then contact the taxi licensing authority and they will consider whether his licence needs to be revoked.

I'm a lawyer working in a local authority and we've revoked driver's licences for a lot less. Good luck OP