Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report.

Introductions were made and the Chair outlined the procedure of the meeting to those present.

The Director of Neighbourhoods and Environmental Services submitted a report that required Members to determine a driver’s continued entitlement to retain a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicles Driver’s Licence.

The Licence Holder and his legal representative and translator were present. The Licensing Team Manager, and Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee were also present.

The Licensing Team Manager outlined details of the application, including the relevant City Council Policy Guidelines.

The Licence Holder and his legal representative were invited to set out the reasons why he ought to be allowed to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence and answered questions from Members.

All parties were then given the opportunity to sum up and make any final comments,

The Sub-Committee received legal advice from the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee in the presence of all those present. 

In reaching their decision, Members felt they should deliberate in private on the basis that this was in the public interest, and as such outweighed the public interest of their deliberation taking place with the parties represented present. 

The Chair announced that the decision and reasons made during private deliberation would be publicly announced in writing within five working days. The Chair informed the meeting the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee would be called back to give advice on the wording of the decision. 

The Chair then asked all but Members of the Sub-Committee and Democratic Support Officers to disconnect from the meeting. The Sub-Committee then deliberated in private to consider their decision. 

The Sub-Committee recalled the Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee to give advice on the wording of the decision.   

RESOLVED:

That the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence be SUSPENDED FOR SIX MONTHS

Members had carefully considered the Committee Report placed before them. Members had taken account, where appropriate, of the Department for Transport’s “Statutory Taxi & Private Hire Vehicle Standards”, the Regulators’ Code and the Council’s “Guidelines on relevance of convictions Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Drivers”. Members had taken account of the oral and written representations.

The Licence Holder had held a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence since 26 April 2013.

On 30 September 2019, the Licence Holder was convicted at trial before the Leicester Magistrates’ Court of an offence of battery contrary to section 39 Criminal Justice Act 1988. He was made subject to a 12-month Conditional Discharge and was ordered to pay £200 costs, £50 compensation, and a victim surcharge of £20.

The conviction fell within the category of ‘Other Offences’ under the Council’s Guidelines on Relevance of Convictions which in the absence of exceptional circumstances, provided for a period free from conviction for such offending which is ‘dependent on circumstances’.

Members had considered the nature, type and circumstances of the Licence Holder’s offending which arose out of an incident on 12 February 2019 when The Licence Holder headbutted another man. The Licence Holder informed Members that he was provoked by the injured party. Members noted that the Court rejected the Licence Holder’s self-defence argument and awarded a small amount of compensation to the injured party.

The Licence Holder was required, in accordance with his Licence, to immediately notify the Council of the conviction. The Licence Holder did not notify his conviction to the Council immediately or at any time. The Licensing Section only became aware of the conviction when informed by Wolverhampton City Council on 13 January 2021, some 16 months after the conviction.

The Licence Holder’s explanation for failing to notify the Council was that he did not appreciate the obligation and was in no way looking to evade the scrutiny of the Committee.

Members had been informed that Wolverhampton City Council refused an application by The Licence Holder in November 2020 for a Driver’s Licence, but Members had decided the matter before them on its own merits.

Members had not been advised of any history of customer complaint against the Licence Holder.

Members were mindful that the protection of the public was their overriding consideration. However, Members noted that the incident on 12 February 2019 was not related to the Licence Holder’s employment as a taxi driver. Members noted the Licence Holder’s explanation of his actions and his indication that this was an isolated incident very much determined by its particular circumstances.

Members noted that when a driver failed to provide the Council with required information, the driver hindered the Council’s ability to exercise its regulatory functions. Despite the explanation provided by the Licence Holder, he should have been aware of the requirement to notify the Council of his conviction. He had been licensed by the Council for approximately 8 years and the requirement was detailed on the front page of his Licence. However, Members took due note of the absence of customer complaint against The Licence Holder in his 8 years as a driver licensed by Leicester City Council.

Members found the circumstances presented to them in this case, constitute grounds under both section 61(1)(a)(i) and section 61(1)(b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and that it was appropriate, in the particular circumstances of this matter, to suspend the Licence for a period of 6 months.

A period of suspension would emphasise to the Licence Holder the need for future compliance to protect the public.

The Licence Holder would be informed of his right to appeal the decision to the Magistrates’ Court within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which he was notified of the decision. The suspension would not have effect until that 21-day period had expired, or if the decision was appealed against, until the appeal was disposed of.