Agenda, decisions and minutes

            None.

To receive any Declarations and advise Members accordingly.

None.

None.

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item as this was considered to contain exempt information by virtue of paragraphs 12 and 13 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

RESOLVED:

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item as this was considered to contain exempt information by virtue of paragraphs 12 and 13 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

The Sub Committee consider that the information disclosed within the DBS is relevant to assessing the fitness and propriety of the licence holder.  Having taken all relevant information and representations into account, the Sub Committee do not consider that it should be disregarded.  The Sub Committee note the principles the Police follow when considering whether such information should be disclosed and this includes such factors as the information being sufficiently credible and serious and that whilst the licence holder has made representations to the Police about the inclusion of this information the Police have determined that it should remain, and there is no current legal challenge.  On a balance of probabilities, the Sub Committee has therefore determined that the licence holder is not a ‘fit and proper’ person within the meaning of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 to continue to hold a Private Hire / Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver Licence and his licence should be revoked.

The report was to consider the conduct of a Private Hire/Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver in respect of additional information disclosed on his Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) Enhanced Certificate at the discretion of the Chief of Police.  Having initially considered the report on 1 September 2021, the panel had resolved to adjourn the hearing to allow for further information to be made available in order to reach a decision on whether the licence holder was a fit and proper person to hold a Private Hire/Hackney Carriage (Joint) Driver Licence.

The Chairman confirmed that the panel had received further documentation provided by the licence holder in advance of the meeting and had been produced to the meeting.  This comprised:

·         Letter from the licence holder in relation to the challenge of the information included on his DBS.

·         Letter from the licence holder addressing different paragraphs of the report from the hearing on 1 September 2021.

·         An email forwarded by the licence holder showing correspondence with his Solicitor.

·         An email forwarded by the licence holder showing previous correspondence with his Solicitor.

In response to questions, the licence holder said that he had been advised that his legal representative had prepared the grounds for his application for judicial review regarding the disclosure remaining on his DBS.  However, no further progress had been made and the licence holder was pursuing a meeting with the legal representative prior to paying the legal fees.  The licence holder expressed his concerns about the lack of response by his legal company with whom he had engaged.

The Licensing Team Leader read out the sections of the report which had been added since the adjourned hearing; namely paragraphs 1.13 to 1.16.

In response to questions from the Solicitor, the licence holder confirmed that he had delayed producing his DBS certificate to the licensing authority because he had been embarrassed about the disclosure and was intent on challenging this to seek its removal from the certificate.

The licence holder said that in his representations to the Police, he had made the point that there had been no evidence to substantiate the allegations and yet the opinion of the Chief of Police overrode that.  He considered this to be a dangerous precedent.  The Solicitor referred to the Statutory Disclosure Guidance that must be considered by the Chief of Police (as set out in the report) on the disclosure of information that was considered relevant.  The licence holder accepted that the Chief of Police had such discretion but said that the opinion was not supported by evidence.

In respect of his legal representatives, the licence holder accepted that there was no current legal challenge but said that he was committed to progressing a judicial review and may seek to use another company if necessary.  When asked about the length of time since the DBS was issued and the lack of any obvious progress with any legal challenge, the licence holder said that he had been seeking to rebuild his life and was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.