RUSHMOOR BOROUGH COUNCIL LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE

Transcription

1 RUSHMOOR BOROUGH COUNCIL LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE Tuesday 26th July, 2016 at a.m. at the Council Offices, Farnborough Minutes of the meeting of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on Tuesday 26th July, 2016 at a.m. at the Council Offices, Farnborough. Present:- Cr. Liz Corps Cr. B. Jones Cr. S.J. Masterson Cr. L.A. Taylor Cr. Jacqui Vosper Ms. S. Bowman - Licensing Authority Ms. K. Wilkinson - Licensing Authority Mrs. D. Milton - Legal Services Manager representing the Solicitor to the Council Ms. W. Harden - Licensing Officer (observing) Mr. C. Todd - Democratic Support Officer, Democratic Services 1. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN RESOLVED: That Cr. Jacqui Vosper be appointed Chairman of the Licensing Sub-Committee for the 2016/17 Municipal Year. 2. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC RESOLVED: That, taking into account the public interest test, the public be excluded from the meeting during the discussion of the under mentioned item to avoid the disclosure of exempt information within the paragraphs of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 indicated against the item: Minute Schedule 12A Category No. Para. Nos. 3 1 and 3 Information relating to any individuals, or the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) 3

2 3. DETERMINATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER S LICENCE The Sub-Committee considered the Head of Environmental Health and Housing s Report No. EHH_LICSUB1621, which set out details of an application for a private hire driver s licence. The applicant, who was accompanied by a representative, confirmed that he had received all relevant paperwork. Firstly, the Sub-Committee held a preliminary hearing to decide whether any of the applicant s driving convictions were relevant. The Licensing Officer outlined the applicant s convictions and the reasons why they might be deemed to be relevant. The Licensing Officer contended that the number of convictions demonstrated repeated behaviour and that Rushmoor s Taxi Licensing Policy stated that driver proficiency was important. The applicant briefly outlined the details of his convictions. He stated that he had not thought that his driving record over the previous nine years would be taken into account and had thought that only the previous 3-4 years would be considered to be relevant. The applicant considered that he had, now, learned his lesson and that this had been demonstrated by receiving only one speeding conviction over the previous four years. He also pointed out that only one of the offences occurred at a time when he was carrying a passenger. The Sub-Committee withdrew to consider whether the convictions should be considered to be relevant. Once the Sub-Committee had made its decision, the meeting was reconvened and the applicant was informed that all convictions were deemed relevant and would be taken into account. The Sub-Committee then moved on to determine whether the application for a private hire driver s licence should be granted and the outcome of this section of the meeting was set out in the decision notice annexed to these minutes. The Meeting closed at p.m. CR. JACQUI VOSPER CHAIRMAN

3 ANNEX Application for a private hire driver s licence Decision Record DATE OF HEARING: 26th July, 2016 MEMBERS SITTING: Crs. Liz Corps, B. Jones, S.J. Masterson, L.A. Taylor and Jacqui Vosper (Chairman)

4 DECISION On the balance of probabilities, the Sub-Committee has decided that it is not satisfied that the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a private hire driver s licence and the application is, therefore, refused. REASONS In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee has taken into account: The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Section 51, which states that the Sub-Committee must not grant a licence to drive a private hire vehicle unless it is satisfied that the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a driver s licence; The Council s Taxi Licensing Policy, particularly paragraph 3.9, which relates to the safety and protection of both the travelling public and other road users and paragraph 5.101, which requires licensed drivers to have high standard in driving; and Written and oral evidence presented at the hearing by both the licensing officers and the applicant. The Sub-Committee considered the report of the licensing officer, which drew attention to paragraph 5.17 of the taxi licensing policy which explained the matter that would be taken into account when deciding whether an applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a driver s licence. The Sub-Committee also heard from the applicant, who agreed that his record did look bad over nearly ten years. He also told the Sub-Committee that he had attended two driver awareness courses in addition to the matters listed.

5 However, the Sub-Committee heard that no complaints about him had been made by other drivers, he had no drink driving convictions and had never been to prison. He said he had learned his lesson and was willing to undergo further training. Unfortunately, in light of the applicant s previous record, the Sub-Committee was not convinced that further training would be effective. The Sub-Committee was concerned that he does not demonstrate the consistently high standards required of drivers and that the safety of the travelling public may be compromised. The Council s legal representative explained that the applicant had the right of appeal to the Magistrate s Court and that any appeal would need to be made within 21 days of the notification of the decision.