Ex-Portsmouth driving instructor Robert Hood accuses DVSA of being ‘corrupt’ and defrauding British public of £50m a year - is served injunction and told to pay over £22,000

Robert Hood, 55, was handed the injunction and told to pay £22,550 costs at Portsmouth County Court for publishing ‘harassing’ social media posts against people at the government department, who he claimed were trying to ‘silence’ him. The defendant admitted to publishing posts with DVSA employees’ addresses while accusing them of abusing students and being ‘corrupt thieves and racists’.

Mr Hood, who was struck off by the Approved Driving Instructors last year after a campaign of harassment towards Red Driving School in Portsmouth, said he was left with no option but to make the posts after DVSA failed to listen to his complaints.

‘Every avenue I’ve taken has been closed to me so my only option is public opinion to expose the truth on the internet. It’s no secret where these people live, it’s in the public domain,’ he said.

READ NOW: Man exposes himself to dog walker

The defendant, of Milton, said he made complaints against DVSA which ‘fell on deaf ears’ over the treatment of some of his driving students who he said were unfairly failed in tests.

He claimed the DVSA had a quota system in place that meant only 50 per cent of drivers were allowed to pass resulting in 800,000 people being ‘deliberately failed a year’, before saying: ‘They pass people that should fail and fail people who should pass.’

He added: ‘They are looking to silence me from exposing the truth. They have been defrauding the public out of £50m annually. I can prove every word.’

The claims were rejected by the DVSA’s barrister Richard Wheeler who said the posts amounted to harassment and had caused ‘great concern’ among department officials.

District judge Samuel said there was ‘no evidence of corruption and conspiracy’ by the DVSA. Referring to the alleged £50m fraud uncovered by Mr Hood, the judge said: ‘I see no evidence to support that.’

He added: ‘(Mr Hood) believes he is pursuing a great wrong to the British public. He says all avenues have been closed down to him and that he didn’t have any other option (but to publish the posts).

‘I believe the conduct amounts to harassment. There is no evidence to support the assertions and I conclude the conduct is not reasonable.’

Regarding the issue of freedom of expression, the judge said that ‘everyone has the right’ to this in a democracy. But he went on to say this freedom was not ‘unfettered’ and had to be ‘balanced against the rights of others’. The judge concluded it was ‘appropriate to make the injunction’ ahead of a trial between the parties.

An application for costs was reduced from just under £28,000 to £22,550 with Mr Hood given 14 days to pay. But Mr Hood said: ‘Due to the corruption involved I’ve been unemployed since June 2021, so I’m not in a position to pay.’

Mr Hood appeared at the county court in November following a £20,000 claim against Louise Berry, a self-employed driving instructor. The case was dismissed by a judge who said the court did not have jurisdiction. Mr Hood was told to pay the defendant’s £1,200 legal fees.