Agenda item

(This item contains personal information regarding applicants and licence holders which is exempt from publication by virtue of Paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972)

The Sub-Committee was informed of three applicants who had given sufficient cause for concern as to be referred to the Sub-Committee for consideration.

Members discussed the applications as appropriate.

S.W (New applicant)

Mr R Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer was in attendance and outlined the relevant information. Mr Ratcliffe highlighted that S.W. not withstanding a previous good record when previously licensed had subsequently been banned from driving for an accumulation of offences.

S.W was in attendance and made representations to the Sub-Committee. He explained that he had a previously never had any issues with his driving and that the incidents were all as a result of starting a new job. He expressed regret for his conduct but highlighted that the timeline of the offences had meant that he had been unable to moderate his driving behaviour prior to reaching twelve points. He emphasised that the courts had also heard this mitigation and imposed a very short ban as a result.

The Sub-Committee considered carefully the evidence submitted. While it took very seriously the offences it also balanced that with S.W’s previous good character and felt that the number of offences had been out of character. It therefore considered that the application should be granted

Resolved:

That the application be dealt by the issuing of a severe warning letter as to future conduct advising that if the licence holder were brought before the Sub-Committee again in the future, suspension or revocation could result.

D.A.M (New applicant)

Mr R Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer was in attendance and outlined the relevant information. Mr Ratcliffe highlighted that a number of historical offences of a violent nature had been disclosed and that the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy outlined that applicants with two or more convictions in the past 10 years for violent offences should normally be refused.

D.A.M. was in attendance and made representations to the Sub-Committee. He explained that the incidents were a long time ago and relatively minor in nature. He expressed regret but emphasised that he had not had any convictions since and was now a responsible family man. He further explained that he had not declared all the convictions as he had been confused as to the status of the conviction.

The Sub-Committee considered carefully the evidence submitted. It considered the offences serious but balanced this would with the time elapsed since the convictions and D.A.M’s conduct since that conviction. Given that D.A.M had clearly attempted to disclose all convictions the Sub-Committee agreed that it would not be proportionate to prosecute for a failure to disclose all the convictions.

Resolved:

1.      That the application be dealt by the issuing of a severe warning letter as to future conduct advising that if the licence holder were brought before the Sub-Committee again in the future, suspension or revocation could result.

2.      Not to prosecute for failure to disclose relevant convictions.

B.S.P (New applicant)

Mr R Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer was in attendance and outlined the relevant information. Mr Ratcliffe highlighted that a number of historical offences of a veryt serious nature had been disclosed  and that B.S.P’s previous conduct as a licence holder had resulted in the eventual revocation of his licence. Mr Ratcliffe reminded members and that the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy outlined that applicants with such a serious driving offence should normally be refused.

B.S.P. was in attendance and made representations to the Sub-Committee. He apologised for his previous conduct and expressed remorse as to the effect of his previous actions. He explained that he considered that he had mellowed

The Sub-Committee considered that B.S.P’s very serious driving offence combined with his previous unacceptably poor behaviour while a licensed driver which had eventually resulted in the revocation of that licence meant that he remained not a fit and proper person to hold such a licence on the ground of both his serious convictions and his past record.  

Resolved:

That the application for a licence be refused