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 applicants and licence holders who had been convicted of offences or otherwise given sufficient cause for concern.

Members discussed the applications and referrals as appropriate.

(i)                  D.J.C (New applicant)

Mr Ryan Ratcliffe, Licensing Officer, was in attendance and outlined the relevant information on behalf of the Authority.

The applicant was in attendance and made representations to the Sub-Committee. He explained that the incident outlined in the report which had resulted in him receiving a Police Caution for Common Assault had been the result of a family dispute involving his father and whilst both men were intoxicated with alcohol.

Members expressed concerns about the recency of the offence and saw no reason to depart form the Policy on this occasion.

Resolved:

To refuse the application for a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence on the grounds that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

(ii)                T.S (Existing Hackney Carriage)

Mr Ratcliffe presented the case on behalf of the authority. Several witnesses named in the report as complainants, were in attendance and made representations in addition to the content of the report. They separately claimed to have witnessed the licence holder refuse fares on two separate occasions either for being unwilling to carry a disabled passenger or for refusing to undertake a journey of relatively short distance.

TS was in attendance and provided detailed accounts of the events and explanations of his actions. He claimed he had been the victim of discrimination from fellow drivers and that he was also medically exempt from carrying wheelchair passengers. With regard to the latter claim, the licence holder produced a doctor’s note which he suggested exempted him from the carriage of wheelchair users. The Licensing Service advised that this was insufficient and that such an exemption was required to be authorised by the Local Authority and not just by a GP. TS further alleged that one of the complainants, one of the complainants appeared to have a vendetta against him and they had previously had a turbulent relationship.

The Sub-Committee reasoned that perhaps the licence holder had been treated unfairly by fellow drivers and potentially there were grounds for the Authority exempting him from providing carriage to disabled passengers. However, TS had failed to get the proper authorisation to refuse fares from disabled passengers. Furthermore, the Sub-Committee expressed concerns that TS had perhaps refused the two fares detailed in the report on the basis that they were short distance fares and therefore not especially lucrative which suggested that perhaps the licence holder was being selective about which fares he took. Inconsistencies between the various accounts provided by the licence holder were also noted by Members.

Resolved: To issue the Hackney Carriage Driver with a Severe Warning Letter in relation to his conduct including the refusal of fares indicating that if he were brought before the Sub-Committee again for any reason, suspension or revocation of the licence would be the likely outcome.

(iii)              A.L.D (Existing Hackney Carriage)

Resolved: Due to the extended duration of the meeting, the Sub-Committee, with the consent of the licence holder, agreed to defer consideration of the case until the next meeting on 12 June 2019.

Background papers: exempt