REVIEW OF A LICENCE TO DRIVE HACKNEY CARRIAGE AND PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLES - DRIVER NO. 507522
6 REVIEW OF A LICENCE TO DRIVE HACKNEY CARRIAGE AND PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLES - DRIVER NO. 15/0269/TXJDR
To consider a confidential report by the Head of Planning and Public Protection (copy enclosed) seeking members’ review of a licence to drive hackney carriage and private hire vehicles in respect of Driver No. 15/0269/TXJDR.
- Restricted enclosure 3 , View reasons restricted (6/2)
- Restricted enclosure 4 , View reasons restricted (6/3)
- Restricted enclosure 5 , View reasons restricted (6/4)
RESOLVED that the hackney carriage and private hire vehicle driver’s licence issued to Driver No. 15/0269/TXJDR be revoked on public safety grounds with immediate effect.
[Councillor Barry Mellor declared a personal interest because he knew two of the witnesses in this case and he left the meeting during consideration of this item.]
A confidential report by the Head of Planning and Public Protection (previously circulated) was submitted upon –
(i) the suitability of Driver No. 15/0269/TXJDR to hold a licence to drive hackney carriage and private hire vehicles following a complaint of road rage;
(ii) details of the complaint having been provided (a summary of facts together with associated witness statements and documentation having been attached to the report);
(iii) the Driver having previously appeared before the Licensing Committee on 10 June 2015 and the outcome of that case, and
(iv) the Driver having been invited to attend the meeting in support of his licence review and to answer members’ questions thereon.
The Driver was in attendance at the meeting with his Legal Representative and confirmed receipt of the report and committee procedures.
The Enforcement Officer (TB) outlined the case as detailed within the report.
The Legal Representative advised that the Driver did not dispute the majority of the allegations in the witness statements and had accepted his conduct during interview. He detailed the circumstances leading up to the incident which had involved the manoeuvre of a tanker at a junction. Following the manoeuvre the Driver had dropped off his passengers and had gone back to see the tanker driver to raise the manner of his driving. However the tanker driver refused to speak to him and walked away and it was at that point he swore at him. There had been no intention to argue but the manner in which the tanker driver reacted had made him lose his temper. The Driver admitted that he had acted inappropriately and had offered a handshake three times. He fully acknowledged his behaviour was unacceptable and the seriousness of the situation and was very remorseful. Whilst the Driver had been before the committee in June 2015 the nature of the case had been different and the Driver had also accepted his guilt on that occasion. Examples as to the Driver’s good character were provided and members were advised that he had been previously licensed outside of the area and had held an unblemished record. Details of the Driver’s personal circumstances were also given which may have affected his reaction to a certain degree and it was argued that to lose his licence would cause financial hardship.
Members took the opportunity to question the Driver on his interview statement and his version of events and queried what he expected to gain from his actions. The Driver advised that he had been unprepared for the interview as he had not been advised of the nature of the complaint but when pressed he confirmed he had an idea about what it would have been about. He elaborated upon the incident from his perspective advising that he felt bullied by the tanker driver and wanted to question him on the manner of his driving but he had been provoked and lost his temper and in hindsight admitted that he would not take that action again. He disputed that he had been ushered off the premises and had tried to apologise at the time. As a licensed driver he regularly witnessed numerous traffic incidents without retaliation and submitted that this case was an isolated incident which would not be repeated in the future.
In his final statement the Legal Representative reiterated that the Driver did not intend an argument when he went back to see the tanker driver and he was genuinely ... view the full minutes text for item 6