- 2 -

Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. DSW Cab Corp.

OATH Index No. 2863/08 (July 15, 2008)

Respondent medallion owner failed to comply with petitioner’s directive to identify the driver who was the subject of a Commission investigation. After respondent defaulted, ALJ sustained the charges and recommended $200 fine and suspension until owner complies with the Commission’s directive.

______

NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIALS AND HEARINGS

In the Matter of

TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION

Petitioner

-against-

DSW CAB CORP.

Respondent

______

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

JOHN B. SPOONER, Administrative Law Judge

The Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC) brought this proceeding alleging that respondent, DSW Cab Corp., failed to comply with a Commission directive to submit proof to the Commission by May 27, 2008, as to the identity of the driver of taxicab 7N27 on May 4, 2008.

Respondent did not appear for a hearing scheduled at this tribunal for July 14, 2008. Petitioner submitted proof of service sufficient to show that it sent the petition and notice of hearing to respondent at its address of record with the Commission (Pet. Exs. 1 and 2).

For the reasons set forth below, I find the evidence sufficient to prove that respondent failed to comply with a valid Commission order and recommend that a suspension be imposed upon respondent until it complies with the order and that a fine in the amount of $200 be imposed on respondent.

ANALYSIS

Medallion owners are required to comply with directives from the Commission and its representatives. Section 1-68(a) of the owners’ rules provides:

An owner shall promptly answer and comply with all questions, communications, directives and summonses from the Commission or its representatives and the NYC Department of Investigation of its representatives.

35 RCNY § 1-68(a).

According to the Commission records, on May 13, 2008, the Commission investigation unit mailed respondent a written directive to submit driver’s information and a trip sheet for taxicab 7N27 regarding an incident that occurred at 1:45 a.m. on May 4, 2008 (see Pet. Ex. 4). As noted in a memo (Pet. Ex. 4) from Director Herman Perez, as of June 16, 2008, nothing had been received by the investigation unit. Therefore, on June 27, 2008, petitioner’s attorney mailed out the petition and notice of hearing, notifying respondent that it had violated Commission rules by failing to supply the requested information. The petition repeated the warning that respondent faces suspension of its medallion license until it complies with the investigation unit directive. The letter scheduled a hearing for July 14, 2008, as noted above.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

1.  Petitioner properly served respondent with the petition and notice of hearing, and respondent is in default.

2.  Respondent failed to comply with a TLC order to provide information relevant to an investigation, in violation of 35 RCNY sections 1-68(a)(1) and 1-86.

RECOMMENDATION

The penalty for the charge proved is a fine of $200 and suspension until respondent complies with the Commission’s specific directive. See 35 RCNY § 1-86. At the close of the default hearing, the commission attorney requested a $200 fine and suspension of respondent’s medallion until it complies with the investigation order. In the absence of any mitigating facts, respondent’s unexplained failure to cooperate and reply to the official directive of the Commission’s investigation unit warrants the requested fine and suspension. It is irresponsible for owners to ignore any rules and directives of the Commission, and is particularly unacceptable where the Commission is attempting to investigate complaints by a passenger against the driver of one of respondent’s taxicabs.

Accordingly, I recommend that a suspension be imposed upon respondent until it complies with the directive and that a fine in the amount of $200 be imposed on respondent.

John B. Spooner

Administrative Law Judge

July 15, 2008

SUBMITTED TO:

MATTHEW W. DAUS

Commissioner/Chair

APPEARANCES:

MARC T. HARDEKOPF, ESQ.

Attorney for Petitioner

No Appearance by Respondent