Agenda item

To consider a confidential report by the Head of Planning and Public Protection (copy enclosed) seeking members’ determination of an application from Applicant No. 15/1446/TXJDR.

RESOLVED that the application for a hackney carriage and private hire vehicle driver’s licence from Applicant No. 15/1446/TXJDR be refused.

A confidential report by the Head of Planning and Public Protection (previously circulated) was submitted upon –

(i)            an application having been received from Applicant No. 15/1446/TXJDR for a licence to drive hackney carriage and private hire vehicles;

(ii)          officers having refused the application under delegated powers after taking into account the convictions disclosed and the Council’s conviction policy;

(iii)         the Applicant having subsequently appealed against officers’ decision to the Magistrates Court following which an agreement was reached that the appeal would cease and the application be referred to the Licensing Committee for determination;

(iv)         detailed the convictions revealed following the enhanced disclosure to the Disclosure and Barring Service together with the Council’s policy with regard to the relevance of convictions, and

(v)          the Applicant having been invited to the meeting in support of his application and to answer members’ questions thereon.

The Applicant was in attendance at the meeting accompanied by his Legal Representatives who confirmed receipt of the report and committee procedures.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report and detailed the facts of the case.

The Applicant’s Legal Representative highlighted some factual inaccuracies in the report and provided some background to the application and how it had appeared before the Licensing Committee for determination, including reference to the proceedings at the Magistrates Court on appeal.  In presenting the Applicant’s case she referred to his previously unblemished record as a licensed driver and his competency when dealing with the public.  The matter for consideration related to the most recent conviction and the Legal Representative elaborated upon the circumstances of that offence and its context within the Council’s licensing policy with regard to the relevance of convictions.  She also argued that, whilst serious, the conviction in this case did not impact on the safety of the public when considering whether the Applicant was fit and proper to hold a licence.  She added that the licensing regime was not designed to punish again and the Applicant had already paid his penalty to society in that regard.  Members’ attention was drawn to the written references provided (circulated at the meeting) attesting to the Applicant’s character and demonstrating his trustworthiness.  In conclusion it was submitted that the Applicant had made a terrible mistake which he had paid for and wished to return to his profession as a licensed driver.

The Applicant and his Legal Representative responded to members’ questions regarding the circumstances of the case and subsequent conviction together with the Applicant’s association with others involved in criminal activity.  The Applicant also responded to assurances sought by the committee regarding his future conduct given the nature and seriousness of the offence.  In making a final statement the Applicant explained how the conviction had devastated his life and of his desire to return as a licensed driver.

The committee adjourned to consider the application and it was –

RESOLVED that the application for a hackney carriage and private hire vehicle driver’s licence from Applicant No. 15/1446/TXJDR be refused.

The reasons for the Licensing Committee’s decision were as follows –

Members had listened very carefully to all the submissions in this case and answers to questions and carefully considered the references provided.  The committee was clear that the purpose of their decision was to deal with the licensing issue and not to inflict further punishment on the Applicant as a result of the offence committed.  It was accepted that the Applicant had not been in further trouble and had no further convictions since his release.  However, the committee’s overriding consideration was safety of the public and under the law must not grant a licence unless satisfied that the Applicant was a fit and proper person.

The committee had concerns given the nature and seriousness of the offence committed in 2010 whilst acting as a licensed driver, using a licensed vehicle, and had not heard sufficient to satisfy them that he was a fit and proper person to hold a licence.  In reaching that decision members had regard to the licensing policy – the aim of the policy to protect the safety of the public, that a person was a fit and proper person, that the person did not pose a threat to the public and that the public had confidence in the use of licensed vehicles.  In weighing the responsibility to the public against the information provided by the Applicant, the committee was not satisfied that he was a fit and proper person to hold a licence.

The committee’s decision and reasons therefore were conveyed to the Applicant and his Legal Representatives together with the right of appeal against the decision to the Magistrates Court within 21 days.

[At this juncture Councillors Barry Mellor, Pete Prendergast and Arwel Roberts left the meeting.]