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 two Hackney Carriage driver applications and a Private Hire vehicle driver application that had given sufficient cause for concern as to be referred to the Sub-Committee for consideration.

Members discussed the applications as follows:

(i)       JLM – New Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence Application

Mr Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer, presented the case on behalf of the Authority.

JLM was in attendance at the meeting and made representations to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee noted that the driver had been convicted of a speeding offence for exceeding the speed limit in a 50mph zone in March 2015 and had also been given a Police caution for burglary with intent to steal in September 2010. In addition, the driver had failed to declare the Police caution in his application to be licensed.

In response to questions about why he had failed to declare the Police caution for the burglary offence, the driver explained that he had made an error when reading the application form and thought the declaration section only applied to formal arrests and convictions. He added that the additional points he had received for the speeding offence related to non-attendance at Court and were added to the standard number of penalty points issued for the original offence.

The Sub-Committee considered the additional information presented by the driver in relation to the offences and agreed a need to encourage greater responsibility to avoid future instances of dishonesty. The Panel balanced the evidence with the fact that the driver had shown remorse in relation to the offences.

Resolved: That the application for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be granted with the addition of a warning letter in relation to future conduct.

(ii)     SMB – New Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence Application

Mr Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer, presented the case on behalf of the Authority.

SMB was not in attendance at the meeting.

Mrs Davies advised the Sub-Committee that the driver may not have had sufficient notice of the meeting.

Resolved: The Sub-Committee agreed to defer the case to its next meeting on 29^th September 2015 to allow the driver the opportunity to attend.

(iii)   WHRS – New Private Hire Vehicle Drivers Licence Application

Mr Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer, presented the case on behalf of the Authority.

WHRS was in attendance at the meeting with his partner and made representations to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee considered the fact that the driver had been convicted of a drink driving offence in December 2013 though it was noted that he had demonstrated remorse in relation to the offence.

In addition to the drink driving offence, the Sub-Committee was advised that the driver had been removed from the Blackpool Borough knowledge examination as part of the application to become a licensed Private Hire Vehicle driver. He had been observed using concealed notes during the test and was removed by the invigilator with his notes confiscated. The driver insisted that the notes had been for revision purposes prior to the test and had not been used during the test.

The Sub-Committee considered the evidence and noted that the driver had been dishonest. They questioned whether the drink driving conviction was also too recent to allow for an application to be granted in any case as the Council required three years to have elapsed following such an offence before consideration of any new licence application. They agreed that there were no exceptional circumstances in this case and concluded that the recency of the drivers drink driving conviction and additional concerns about his dishonest behaviour meant he was not a suitable person to hold a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence.

Resolved: That the application for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be refused on the grounds that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

Background papers: exempt