Decision details

Application for a Private Hire / Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver Licence

Decision Maker: Licensing Sub-Committee

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

The Chair welcomed the applicant and introduced the Members of the Sub-Committee and the Council officers.    The Chairman asked the applicant if he wished the hearing to be deferred so that he could be assisted with the services of an interpreter.  The applicant said he did not require an interpreter and confirmed he was able to hear and understand the proceedings.  The Chairman explained the procedure for the hearing, including how the application would be determined.

 

3.         APPLICATION FOR A PRIVATE HIRE / HACKNEY CARRIAGE (JOINT) DRIVER LICENCE 

 

                        The Licensing Team Leader presented the report to consider an application for a Private Hire/Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver Licence, licensed by the Authority. 

 

The Licensing Team Leader explained that the application had asked for details of any previous convictions, however, the applicant had not completed this section of the application form.  On receipt of the applicant’s Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) enhanced criminal records disclosure a conviction for battery was shown.  Details of the conviction were appended to the report.  The applicant was asked to provide written explanation of the conviction and also his failure to complete section 5 of the application form.  The applicant’s response was  attached as appendix C to the report.  The applicant was invited to appear before the Licensing Sub Committee to determine whether he was a fit and proper person to hold a Joint Driver Licence. 

 

The Chairman invited the applicant to give a full explanation of his previous conviction as detailed on the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) enhanced criminal records disclosure. 

 

The applicant referred to his written explanation to address his conviction and provided background information of how the offence had been committed.  He responded to the questions raised concerning how long he had lived in the United Kingdom, his personal and family circumstances, and his employment background.  

 

The Solicitor questioned the applicant in detail concerning his conviction for battery and failure to disclose it on section 5 of the application form.  The applicant said he was ashamed of his offence but did not believe he was guilty and explained it was out of character and had occurred at a time during a domestic dispute.  He reiterated the circumstances which had provoked it and said despite the conviction he continued to have a stable family life.  The applicant explained that he had made a mistake in not providing details of his conviction on the form but held the view that he was not a criminal.  

 

Prior to further questioning the Solicitor asked the applicant if he fully understood the questions being raised and the proceedings of the hearing and if he required the services of an interpreter.  The applicant responded that he could hear and understand and confirmed that he did not require assistance from an interpreter.

 

The Solicitor questioned the applicant regarding section 7 of the application form which asked for references and asked why he had not provided details of his last employer as a referee.  The Solicitor also referred to section 4 which asked for employment details and also an explanation for the reason for leaving.  The Solicitor questioned the applicant in detail regarding his previous employment and his reason for leaving.  The applicant explained that he had been dismissed by his last employer and detailed the circumstances which had led to his dismissal.  At this point, the applicant provided written information which provided details of his conviction for  assault against another employee which had taken place at his place of work.  The applicant also disclosed that he had recently attended court and had received a fine and a suspended sentence, and had been cautioned that if he committed a further criminal offence he would receive a prison sentence.  The applicant circulated a letter to the Panel which provided  details of the offence. 

 

The Solicitor questioned the applicant in further detail concerning his recent conviction for assault and the circumstances which had given rise to it.  The applicant said that he was innocent of the charge and had been the victim of aggressive behaviour towards him by another employee.  The applicant said he had sought legal advice and would appeal against his sentence and explained that there was a CCTV recording of the incident which provided evidence that he had not committed assault. 

 

The Solicitor asked the applicant if he had mounted a claim for unfair dismissal with an employment tribunal.  The Solicitor also asked the applicant why he had stated on section 4 of his application form that his reason for leaving his employment was due to “unsuitable hours”.

 

The Solicitor asked the applicant to consider how he would address the issue of challenging and confrontational behaviour by customers in his vehicle if his application for a licence was successful.  The applicant said he was not a violent or aggressive person by nature and had a stable family life. He said he had been provoked in both cases but he was not guilty of assault.

 

A member of the Panel asked the applicant if there was any connection between the previous conviction for domestic related violence and the recent conviction for assault.  The applicant stated there was not and said they were both isolated incidents.

 

                        When the Chairman was satisfied that all relevant questions had been raised, he requested that the applicant and the Licensing Team Leader leave the meeting whilst the application was determined.     

 

 

3.1       Determination of the Application  

 

                        In determining the application, the Sub Committee considered Flintshire County Council’s guidance on the treatment of convictions, cautions, criminal charges, or other recorded sanctions, which was appended to the report. The Panel paid particular attention to paragraph 4.18 which related to violence.  The Panel were very concerned about the applicant’s inconsistent accounts of his recent conviction for assault.  The Panel were also concerned about his failure to disclose his earlier conviction for battery on section 5 of his application, and failure to disclose dismissal from employment on section 4 of the form as the reason for leaving his employment.

 

                        The Panel were mindful of the overarching duty to protect the public and took the view that on balance the protection of the public would be undermined if the applicant was granted a licence.

 

                        The Licensing Team Leader and the applicant were invited to return so that the meeting could be reconvened.

 

3.2       Decision

           

                        The Chairman advised the applicant that the Sub-Committee had carefully  considered all the representations made, including the accounts of his offences and the additional information provided at the meeting concerning a further recent conviction for a violence (that also resulted in his dismissal at a previous employment due to the offence occurring whilst on work premises during working time against a former work colleague) related offence that the Sub-Committee were not aware of prior to this hearing. The Panel were very concerned about the applicant’s explanations of his convictions including, whilst it was noted the applicant planned to appeal to the Crown Court against that particular conviction, the very recent conviction received on the week of this hearing.  The Chairman advised that the Panel had an overarching duty to protect the public and with that in mind concluded that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to hold a private hire/hackney carriage (joint) driver licence and therefore the application was refused.

 

                        The Chairman explained to the applicant that he is entitled to make a fresh application at any time especially relevant if there was any material change in his circumstances such as successful appeal regarding conviction. However that is not to suggest that any subsequent application would be successful (or unsuccessful), simply that it would be considered again by the Sub-Committee.  The Chairman advised the applicant that he had 21 days to appeal against the decision.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be refused as the applicant was not considered to be a fit and proper person to hold a Private Hire/Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver Licence under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

 

 

(The hearing commenced at 2.00 pm and ended at 3.30 pm)

 

 

Report author: Gemma Potter

Publication date: 06/08/2019

Date of decision: 17/01/2019

Decided at meeting: 17/01/2019 - Licensing Sub-Committee

  • Restricted enclosure  View reasons restricted
  • Restricted enclosure  View reasons restricted
  • Restricted enclosure  View reasons restricted
  • Restricted enclosure  View reasons restricted
  • Restricted enclosure  View reasons restricted
  •