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.

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.20 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.

Report of the Executive Director

The subject of the decision:

The Panel considered whether any action needed to be taken against a hackney carriage and private hire driver licence holder (“Mr B”).

Alternative options considered:

The Panel considered all of the options outlined in paragraph 7.1 of the Executive Director’s report but having concluded that Mr B was not a fit and proper person to hold a hackney carriage and private hire driver licence the only suitable option was to revoke the licence with immediate effect. 

The Panel was not satisfied that anything less than immediate revocation including issuing a warning or suspension would adequately serve the interests of the public and address the concerns raised. 

The reason for the decision:

The Panel considered evidence of an allegation that Mr B had discussed inappropriate subject matter, made inappropriate remarks and used offensive language in the presence of children whilst undertaking a school run contract.

The Panel considered the summary of the accounts of six children describing their experiences obtained by North Yorkshire Police during the investigation of the allegations.  The accounts were taken by Police Officers and the children had a parent or guardian present during the interview.

The Panel noted North Yorkshire Police concluded the matter was not one for criminal investigation although if substantiated the allegations may raise concerns as to an individual’s suitability to act as a hackney carriage and private hire driver. 

The Panel considered the record of discussion on 4^th May 2016 which was produced as part of the Executive Director’s report.  The Panel noted at the hearing Mr B confirmed the record was a true account of the discussion. 

The Panel considered the report of the Executive Director, the written and oral submissions made by and on behalf of Mr B and had due regard to the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy and the relevant legislation. 

The Panel heard submissions from Mr B and his employer that Mr B had been “stitched up” by his previous employer.   The Panel was satisfied that the source of the allegation was irrelevant as the Police had carried out independent enquiries with the children concerned.  The Panel did not accept that any of the children had been persuaded to falsify the remarks alleged.  The Panel noted that each of the children’s accounts was distinct and unrehearsed.  The Panel was satisfied that the accounts of the children did not appear to be of a malicious nature and the Panel noted that Mr B accepted this point in his discussion with officers on the 4^th May 2016.    

The Panel was satisfied none of the children would have any reason to lie and it appeared through the children’s accounts and Mr B’s own representations that the children liked Mr B.  The Panel also concluded the children would be unlikely to lie in such a stressful situation as being interviewed by a Police Officer with a parent/guardian present.   The Panel was therefore satisfied that Mr B’s previous employer could not have had  ...  view the full minutes text for item LAHP.20