Agenda and minutes

Venue: Main Committee Room, Civic Centre, Stone Cross, Northallerton

Contact: Democratic Services Officer  01609 767015

Items
No. Item

LAHP.9

Exclusion of the Public and Press

To consider passing a resolution under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 excluding the press and public from the meeting during consideration of item 3 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act.

Minutes:

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public were excluded from the meeting during consideration of the item of business at minute no LAHP.10 on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act as the Panel was satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

LAHP.10

Application for a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver Licence

Report of the Director of Law and Governance (Monitoring Officer)

Minutes:

The subject of the decision:

 

The Panel was asked to consider whether to grant or refuse an application for a hackney carriage and private hire driver licence submitted by the applicant. 

 

Alternative options considered:

 

The Panel considered the options outlined in the Director’s report and it was not satisfied that the applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a hackney carriage and private hire driver’s licence.  Therefore, the application was refused.

 

The reason for the decision:

 

The Panel considered the Executive Director’s report, the application for a hackney carriage and private hire driver licence, the Disclosure and Barring Service enhanced criminal record check for the applicant, the applicant’s oral representations and written submissions, the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy and the relevant legislation.

 

The Panel acknowledged that there was an error in the officer’s report which referred to applicant’s conviction as a caution.  The Panel considered the conviction in line with the true position (i.e. that the applicant received a conviction as opposed to a caution) and applied the Council’s Policy accordingly.  In any event the Panel was satisfied that, as cautions are treated in the same way as convictions for the purposes of determining an applicant’s suitability, the applicant was not prejudiced by the error in the report.

 

The Panel considered the applicant’s conviction on 10th March 2017 under Section 35 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006.  The applicant maintained that the company for which he worked was responsible for complying with the requirements of the Wireless Telegraph Act 2006 and therefore he, as an individual, should not have been convicted.  The Panel noted paragraph 1.4 of Annex E of the Council’s policy which prevents the licensing authority from reviewing the merits of the conviction. The Panel concluded that the applicant’s conviction demonstrated a failure to comply with regulatory requirements. 

 

The Panel considered the applicant’s driving offences from 2015 and the subsequent six month disqualification of his DVLA driving licence.  The applicant maintained that two speeding offences had been committed by third parties using vehicles registered in his name.  The applicant also insisted that the six penalty points imposed following his failure to give details of the drivers at the time of the speeding offences occurred as a result of him being out of the country.  The Panel again noted paragraph 1.4 of Annex E of the Council’s policy which prevents the licensing authority from reviewing the merits of the conviction. The Panel also acknowledged paragraph 8.10 of Annex E of the Council’s policy which indicates that any applicant who has been disqualified from driving would not normally be granted a licence within twelve months.  The Panel acknowledged that this twelve month period had now elapsed.  However, the Panel remained concerned about the applicant’s apparent inability to comply with road traffic legislation. 

 

The Panel considered the applicant’s failure to disclose his private hire driver licence previously held with Bradford City Council until October 2015 when it was revoked following his DVLA licence disqualification.  ...  view the full minutes text for item LAHP.10