BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 ND JANUARY 2008 AT A.M.

Transcription

1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 (v) BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 ND JANUARY 2008 AT A.M. P P A P A P P P Councillor Clare Campion-Smith (Chair) Councillor Chris Davies Councillor Brenda Hugill Councillor Jay Jethwa Councillor Abdul Malik Councillor Charlie Price Councillor Ron Stone (for Cllr Hugill) Councillor Mary Sykes (for Cllr Malik) PSP 115.1/08 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST (i) Apologies Apologies were received from Councillor Hugill, substitute Councillor Stone; and Councillor Malik, substitute Councillor Sykes. (ii) Declarations of Interest Councillor Campion-Smith stated that she was a Governor of Claremont School and Simon Munden has a contract to transport children to and from that School. She therefore absented herself from the meeting for Agenda Items Nos. 4, 5 6 and 7. Councillor Stone stated that at one time he had lived at the street as the Munden family. PSP 116.1/08 PUBLIC FORUM Nothing was received. PSP 117.1/08 CONSIDERATION OF THE SUSPENSION OF COMMITTEE PROCEDURE RULES (CMR 10 AND 11) RELATING TO THE MOVING OF MOTIONS AND RULES OF DEBATE FOR THE DURATION OF THE MEETING

2 RESOLVED - that having regard to the quasi-judicial nature of the business on the agenda, those Committee Rules relating to the moving of motions and the rules of debate (CMR10 and 11) be suspended for the duration of the meeting. PSP 118.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE LICENCE IN RESPECT OF A VEHICLE (REG NO: Y308 KCF) WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE VEHICLE SPECIFICATION POLICY APPLICANT: SIMON MUNDEN (Councillor Campion-Smith having declared an interest left the meeting for this item and the following three items. Councillor Jethwa took the Chair for these items.) This application was considered by the Members at the same time as the one for vehicle registration number S573 JVC. The sub-committee considered a report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 4) determining an application for the grant of a Private Hire Vehicle Licence. The Licensing Officer explained to Members that the legislation was changing on 28 th January 2008 to close a loophole that exempted certain vehicles used in certain contracts from the licensing regime. From 28 th January 2008 all such vehicles and their drivers would require Private Hire Licenses. The vehicles in question had been contracted by Bristol City Council to provide home to school transport. They had been maintained to the same level as licensed private hire and hackney carriage vehicles. They were however now too old to comply with City Council s Policy in relation to the Licensing of Private Hire Vehicles for the first time and an exception to the Policy was being sought. The Head of Legal Services Representative and the Licensing Manager advised Members that this application needed to be treated on its own merits. It was for the applicant to show that an exception to policy was appropriate in the particular circumstances of his cases. Therefore any decision made today did not set a precedent; any other applications for exceptions to the Policy would have to be judged on their merits.

3 The Members left the building to inspect the vehicles that were parked outside. Upon return the Chair explained to Mr Munden the procedure that would be followed. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for Members. The applicant had assured that if the vehicles were licensed they would continue to be used for the same purpose as at present home to school transport only. The fundamental policy issue with both of the vehicles was their age as at first application. In response to Members questions the officer confirmed that: - the upper age limit for renewing existing vehicle licences under the policy was ten years; - if a licence was granted a condition could be attached requiring a notice on the vehicle regarding its use; - the applicant has a private hire operators licence; - the applicant operates a number of brand new private hire vehicles; Mr Munden then put his case that these applications were exceptional and answered questions highlighting the following: The vehicles in question were not new when purchased by him but had low mileage; they had previously been owned by the City Council His company had operated since 1949 doing school contracts. Confirmed that the vehicles would continue to be used for the same purpose as at present home to school transport only. They were specialist vehicles with the same drivers using them each day His company has a large fleet of PSV licensed vehicles as well as these vehicles that were the only private hire ones they have that are outside of the vehicle specification. Had not sought licences when acquiring because clearly not needed; these used exclusively by council under a contract of many years standing and so had clearly been exempt from

4 the requirement for a licence Would not ideally like any of the vehicles in his company s fleet to be over 10 years old Wanted to keep the vehicles so as to continue the contract work but would look to replace before reaching age of ten years One of the vehicles able to carry two wheelchairs Would submit vehicles for more regular checks if required Intended to use these two vehicles for school transport only On this basis he considered these two applications could be treated as exceptional and a licence granted notwithstanding the The Licensing Manager reminded the Committee of its Policy. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 1. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. RESOLVED - That application for a Private hire vehicle licence in respect of vehicle registration number Y308 KCF be granted subject to the following additional condition: that signage indicating the nature of hiring of this vehicle (school transport service) to be approved as soon as possible and in any event before end of March 2008, such sign to be affixed to the vehicle and displayed at all times that it was used for hire and reward PSP 119.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE LICENCE IN RESPECT OF A VEHICL (REG NO: S573

5 JVC) WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE VEHICLE SPECIFICATION POLICY - APPLICANT: SIMON MUNDEN This application was considered by the Members at the same time as the one for vehicle registration number Y308 KCF. For details of its consideration see above. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 2. RESOLVED - That application for a Private hire vehicle licence in respect of vehicle registration number S573 JVC be granted subject to the following additional condition: that signage indicating the nature of hiring of this vehicle (school transport service) to be approved as soon as possible and in any event before end of March 2008, such sign to be affixed to the vehicle and displayed at all times that it was used for hire and reward PSP 120.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER S LICENCE FROM AN APPLICANT WHO HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ASPECTS OF THE FIT AND PROPER PERSON POLICY APPLICANT: PHILLIP JOHN LACEY The sub-committee considered a report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 6) seeking consideration of an application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence. The Chair explained to Mr Lacey the procedure that would be followed. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for Members. Mr Lacey then put his case and answered questions highlighting the following: He identified the vehicle he drove Only wants to drive home to school transport not any other type of professional driving Works only 4 hours per school day, 2 hours in the morning

6 and 2 in the afternoon, 15 miles a day 190 days each year Has 10 years experience of transporting children with special needs Knows the children well Does not have to physically assist the children as they are in electric wheelchairs Drives around 3,000 miles per year in the vehicle Has been checked by the CRB Has not undergone the medical examination but considers he is fit to be licensed The Licensing Officer confirmed that Passenger Services carry out an enhanced CRB check on all contracted drivers. The Licensing Manager reminded the Committee of its Policy. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 3. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. RESOLVED - (i) that Phillip John Lacey be granted a Private Hire Driver s License for a period of 3 months; (ii) that upon seeking renewal of that licence he be required to provide to the Council the result of a medical assessment made in line with the Council s fit and proper person policy. PSP 121.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE

7 DRIVER S LICENCE FROM AN APPLICANT WHO HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ASPECTS OF THE FIT AND PROPER PERSON POLICY APPLICANT: PETER HENSHALL The sub-committee considered a report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 7) seeking consideration of an application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence. The Chair explained to Mr Henshall the procedure that would be followed. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for Members. Mr Henshall then put his case and answered questions highlighting the following: His case was similar to that of Mr Lacy s; Only wants to drive to home to school transport vehicles and not any other professional driving; The children he transports are always accompanied by suitably medically trained escorts or parents, who are also trained; his job is limited to driving, assistance in access and egress afforded to passenger by accompanying adult; He has been doing this run since September 2007 He was previously doing a similar run using the same vehicle for 12 months previously Has worked for Mr Munden driving coaches for 20 years and more recently driving minibuses for 3 to 4 years Regards himself as medically fit Drives miles per day in total; that is enough for him The Licensing Manager reminded the Committee of its Policy. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 4.

8 All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. RESOLVED - (i) that Peter Henshall be granted a Private Hire Driver s License for a period of 3 months; and (ii) that upon seeking renewal of that licence he be required to provide to the Council the result of a medical assessment made in line with the Council s fit and proper person policy. PSP 122.1/08 EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC RESOLVED - that under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, as amended. PSP 123.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER S LICENCE APPLICANT: AMC (Exempt under paragraph 3 Information relating to a person s financial or business affairs) The sub-committee considered an exempt report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 9) considering an application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence. AMC had been a licensed driver between May 2004 and August 2007; he had surrendered his licence following his disqualification from driving. The Chair explained to AMC the procedure that would be followed. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for Members highlighting the convictions for AMC. The Licensing Officer also tabled a letter from ANC s Ward Councillor supporting his application. A copy of the letter is contained in the Minute Book.

9 AMC put his case to be treated as an exception as follows: On the day for which he had been convicted he had food poisoning and was feeling very unwell; he did not know what was happening. He parked his car and went to sleep on the back seat. He thought that at least somebody might see him. He lost consciousness then awoke in the Police station. The Police told him he was under the influence of alcohol and he said not, he invited them to take a blood test. He was in a cell; the Police bailed him and they asked would he accept he was drunk in charge of a vehicle and he said he would not. Three to four weeks later they charged him and he went to see some solicitors. The solicitors said he should fight it in court. The Police then wrote and said that if he would accept the offence of failing to provide a specimen then they would drop the other one. He said he would not admit that. That was in In 2007 the case went to court but instead of a trial he just got fined for these offences. He had contacted different solicitors to try to fight the case, a famous solicitor called Nick something who said it would cost him to get acquitted so he accepted he was guilty of a crime that he did not in fact commit. He told the council and he handed everything over. He has now served his sentence and wants to return to his job, this is his only form of income and if he loses that then he has run out of people he can borrow money from. Because of this conviction he cannot get any other sort of driving job because the insurance is so high. He had offered his blood but nobody was interested, in his view there was no evidence of anything, his solicitor had told him that he was guilty unless he could prove otherwise so here he is. Personally he does not even drink, he had provided blood samples for the return of his DVLA licence and there was no trace of alcohol or anything wrong. The Chair asked how it took so long for the matter to come to court? The applicant explained that he had represented himself at first, then he had a solicitor who advised him that three monkies sit and hear the case first and then you go to the Crown Court to appeal against the conviction. He was tired of it all and so he accepted the conviction and then handed over his badge. He was now finding out the consequences of that. One Member queried what had been said; the report showed a

10 conviction for failing to provide a sample but the applicant was here saying that when he offered to provide a sample it was refused? The Licensing officer explained his understanding of the usual process was that the suspect is taken to the Police station and asked to provide a breath sample, if the suspect failed then the option was to give a sample of urine or blood. The Applicant said he had been unconscious on arrival at the station, when he woke up he was in the Police station and he was vomiting, he was asking why he was in the Police station. He was asking if there was a video. He believed they found him unconscious and then he woke up in the station. He said he had parked his car outside his house. He was feeling bad. He passed out. The car was parked under a street lamp. The Police found him about three hours later in the back seat of the car. The Chair asked why the Police believed him to have been driving the car? The Applicant said he was the only person who could know that. He had left the front seat of his car and gone into the back seat. Everything was in the car. He went to his GP who said he had gastritis but the Police did not want to know about this, the GP was looking twenty four hours back and that was the GP diagnosis, the applicant thought it was food poisoning. He believed he would be found not guilty. His solicitor said he had a fifty-fifty chance of that. The other solicitor said yes, he would be acquitted but he could not afford him so he let his fate be decided. When asked why he had ventured into the back seat of his car the applicant said this was because he was vomiting, he had considered the back seat being leather would be easier to clean. One Councillor said he found it curious that a Police officer having found somebody was unconscious and had been vomiting would then take that person to the station and put him in a cell The applicant said that an ambulance had been called and tested his blood sugar, that was the word of the Police revealed in correspondence between the Police and his solicitor, the Police had said they had called an ambulance and then taken him to the

11 cell. Another councillor said he did not think that was normal procedure to take a suspect to a cell in an ambulance. The applicant said he did not know, this is what he was told, he had been charged some four to five weeks after the event. He had attended at his doctor s the following day and thought he had a twenty four hour thing, he thought if he had a good solicitor he would not be convicted, he did not know why the Police had said they would drop one charge if he accepted another but what he could say is that people who know him can say that he does not drink. The licensing officer said there had been a trial fixed and the magistrates must have been presented with evidence The applicant said that when he came to in the police cell the Police had told him he had been in charge of a vehicle whilst intoxicated. They had not requested a sample of is breath and he was charged with two offences some four weeks afterwards. He had been in the Police station for 6 to 8 hours, until about midday. He had felt ill at about 1am or 2am and had thought about calling an ambulance, but then he felt that he would be ok, he was sick but not bad ; so he thought he would drive to the hospital. He got into his car but he felt ill so he got into the back of his car, he did not want to go back to his flat in case he died. He thought if he was outside and something bad happened then somebody would find him. Then he passed out. It was too far to walk to the hospital because at that time of night the Donan road gate nearest to his home, is closed. He had finished work at 4 or 5 pm the day before and had returned to the house. He was alone in his home. He had been convicted but in his belief he did not commit any offence. He has suffered enough. He had a clean licence before this and he had handed his badges over as soon as he was convicted. The Chair referred to the Council s usual policy for drink driving offences of five years off the road and that the applicant needed to show why that policy should not be applied to him. The Committee Clerk indicated his belief that there is no A&E department at Southmead hospital; the applicant said he did not

12 know that. In the light of the case made by the applicant the licensing officer referred to the notification that had been made by the Police whilst the applicant was still a licensed driver, namely that he had been seen by officers slumped over the wheel. He smelt of intoxicating liquor and failed to provide a specimen for analysis. The applicant having nothing else he wished to say All parties and the relevant representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room whilst the committee made its decision. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 5. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. At this stage the applicant said he had a letter from the DVLA and the traffic commissioner to say he could drive again. The Chair said that concerned his DVLA licence, not the licence he was applying for here. RESOLVED - that the application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence in respect of AMC be refused on the grounds that he had not satisfied the Council that he was a fit and proper person to hold such a license. PSP 124.1/08 PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER RECENT FINDING OF GUILT AT BRISTOL MAGISTRATES COURT - LICENCE HOLDER OMS (Exempt under paragraph 3 Information relating to a person s financial or business affairs) The sub-committee considered an exempt report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 10) considering whether any action should be taken in respect of the Private Hire Driver s Licence held by OMS, following a recent finding of guilt at Bristol Magistrates Court. The Chair explained to OMS the procedure that would be followed. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for

13 Members highlighting the convictions for unlawful plying for hire and no insurance. The Committee sought advice in respect of the reference in the report that the magistrates hoped he would not lose his licence in consequence of their finding. The Head of Legal Services Representative advised that it was neither possible nor desirable for Justices to seek to predetermine the outcome of a hearing such as this one. Firstly because the issue at a hearing such as this was very different to that before Magistrates trying a criminal case, for example the magistrates would not have had before them the relevant factors that have to be taken into account in a case such as this, for example relevant local policy. The criminal courts were not empowered to direct how the Council should determine an application; this was an administrative decision that fell to be made on normal principles of public law, in accordance with the rules of natural justice and with a view to achieving the purpose for which the Council (and not the criminal courts) had been granted the discretion to suspend or revoke licences on specified grounds. It was trite law that in the exercise of discretion predetermination is always unlawful. Secondly because if an outcome was adverse for the licensee and an appeal followed then that appeal would fall to be tried by the Magistrates and the Council was entitled to a hearing that was fair and was seen to be fair. She advised that the Committee should take care to approach the case with an open mind and have regard to those factors that were relevant to the issue before them, ignoring irrelevant considerations. As established in the case law it was for an applicant to prove that an exception to policy could be made in his case without imperilling the purpose for which the policy was made. OMS then put his case and answered questions highlighting the following: He had received his Private hire Driver s License on 1 st May 2007 The different regulations relating to Private Hire and hackney Carriages had not been explained to him by the Licensing Office although his friends had made him aware of them He had picked up the two passengers and then tied to make a booking in relation to them through his office after they

14 were in the car He had only been driving (taxis) for a few weeks, was inexperienced and was not aware of the consequences of unlawful plying for hire. He had been trying to book the passengers, he was saying he had two customers and asking shall I book but the controller had not sent the job. This was when the customers were already in the car. He knew he had picked them up without a booking, but he was trying to book them in after they got into the car. Had spent 500 on training to be a taxi driver, had lessons fr more than a year He did not mean to break the law Worked for Yellow Cabs who only asked to see his license and explained how the radio worked Often waited at Severn Shed for jobs from Yellow Cabs Had been the in the UK for 6 and a half years Had previously worked for a food company The Licensing Officer summarised a witness statement two officers had flagged down the car driven by OMS and asked are you available? ; The driver had responded yes. As the vehicle pulled away the driver called in to base and asked can you book in two going to the Marriot? and had said to the two passengers That s safe, isn t it? The Licensing Officer then stated that OMS had applied for a license on 24 th August He had signed to confirm that he had received a copy of the Conditions. It appeared from what he was saying that he had indeed been aware of the law forbidding Private Hire Drivers picking passengers up off the street as he had called the job in after picking up the passenger. The licensee said the only thing he had been given in Bristol city council was a certificate. He said a lot of people like him from foreign countries do not know the consequence of doing this. Two months had not been enough to learn, he knew afterwards. He was attending today to say he was sorry. He had pleaded guilty. He has a loan to pay and this conviction had resulted in

15 higher insurance premium up by 48 per cent. He admits his fault and he apologises. In response to questions from the councillors he said that by that s safe isn t it? he meant that he believed he had booked for them. The Councillor said that comment suggested to him that OMS was well aware that he was not allowed to pick up passengers who had not been booked? OMS said he knew the difference between private hire and hackney because his friend explained it to him and he knew the consequences of flying so he thought he would book his passengers in himself. The Chair said there was a public interest issue connected with this, one aspect of that was the invalidation of insurance cover OMS said that was why he lost out on his insurance now. He is very kind to the public, this the first time he made a mistake. The Licensing Manager reminded the Committee of its Policy and it was emphasised to OMS that this was his chance to explain why he should be treated as an exception to that policy which envisaged him being off the road for at least six months OMS said he was here to show the committee how serious were his debts and so would they please do him a favour? All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room. Details of the Committee s findings and reasons for the decision are set out in Appendix 6. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. RESOLVED - (i) that the Private Hire Driver s License held by OMS be revoked on the grounds contained in section 61 (1) (a) (ii) of the Act (failure to comply with the provisions of the Act of 1847) and section 61 (2) (any other reasonable cause, namely that the council is no longer satisfied that OMS is a fit and proper person to hold such a licence

16 PSP 125.1/08 APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER'S LICENCE FAILED PRESCRIBED MEDICAL APPLICANT: MAR (Exempt under paragraph 3 Information relating to a person s financial or business affairs) The sub-committee considered an exempt report of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development (agenda item no. 11) considering an application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver's Licence. The Chair explained to MAR the procedure that would be followed. MAR tabled a further letter concerning his medical condition a copy of which is contained in the Minute Book. The Licensing Officer presented his report and summarised it for Members highlighting that MAR had failed the prescribed medical examination. MAR then put his case and answered questions The Licensing Manager reminded the Committee of its Policy. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development left the room. The Committee considered this applicant to be an impressive man but was concerned that the two medical opinions they had received were in conflict with each other. Also in a key respect one opinion was difficult to reconcile with the facts laid out in the report. The Committee had to have clarity about the medical position and wished officers to request the medical experts to liaise and attend if need be so this could be resolved in the public interest, or at least to answer the specific questions the committee identified as needing a response from them. The committee identified documentation they would wish to consider also. The application should be deferred meanwhile. All parties and the representatives of the Director of Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development of returned to the room to hear the decision of the Committee. RESOLVED - that determination of the application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence in respect of MAR be deferred

17 PSP 126.1/08 COMPLAINT OF OFFENDING CONDUCT HOLDER OF HACKNEY CARRIAGE DRIVER S LICENCE: MAA (Exempt under paragraph 3 Information relating to a person s financial or business affairs) MAA did not attend the meeting. It was RESOLVED - that consideration of this application be deferred until a future meeting of the Committee. PSP 127.1/08 DATE OF NEXT MEETING RESOLVED - that the next meeting of the Public Safety and Protection Committee be held on Tuesday 12 TH February 2008 at a.m. (The meeting ended at 3.00 pm.) CHAIR

18 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 1 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 118.1/08 Agenda item no: 4 Agenda title APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE LICENCE IN RESPECT OF A VEHICLE (REG No. Y308KCF) WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE VEHICLE SPECIFICATION POLICY APPLICANT - SIMON MUNDEN Findings of Fact The vehicle is used exclusively for home to school transport under contract to Bristol City Council. Decision That application for a Private hire vehicle licence in respect of vehicle registration number Y308 KCF be granted subject to the following additional condition: that signage indicating the nature of hiring of this vehicle (school transport service) to be approved as soon as possible and in any event before end of March 2008, such sign to be affixed to the vehicle and displayed at all times that it was used for hire and reward Reason for Decision The Committee noted that the company has provided home to school transport for the City Council for a number of years. The operator is very experienced and has a good reputation. The vehicle has been specially modified and is only used specifically for home to school transport. The vehicle s recorded mileage, as observed on inspection, was consistent with that. The committee considered that, but for the exemption provisions that were about to be repealed, application could have been made to licence the vehicle when it was still within the age range permitted under the policy and in all probability such an application would have been granted and renewal permitted until ten years of age. Refusal would serve no purpose other than to deny passengers of a much needed specialist service. The committee therefore concluded that the applicant had made a sound case for departure from the vehicle specification Policy in relation to this specific application and they granted a Private Hire Vehicle License. The Committee would not anticipate application being made to re-licence the vehicle to be used beyond the age of ten years. Mr Munden had promised that this is the only purpose that the vehicle will

19 be used for should a license be granted. Members would wish to review their decision should this prove not to be the case in practice. Members considered that a suitable sign ought to be affixed to the vehicle denoting its use for home-school transport and imposed a condition aimed at achieving this. Chair s Signature

20 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 2 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 119.1/08 Agenda item no: 5 Agenda title APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE LICENCE IN RESPECT OF A VEHICLE (REG No. S573JVC) WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE VEHICLE SPECIFICATION POLICY APPLICANT - SIMON MUNDEN Findings of Fact The vehicle is used exclusively for home to school transport under contract to Bristol City Council. Decision That application for a Private hire vehicle licence in respect of vehicle registration number S573 JVC be granted subject to the following additional condition: that signage indicating the nature of hiring of this vehicle (school transport service) to be approved as soon as possible and in any event before end of March 2008, such sign to be affixed to the vehicle and displayed at all times that it was used for hire and reward Reason for Decision The Committee noted that the company has provided home to school transport for the City Council for a number of years. The operator is very experienced and has a good reputation. The vehicle has been specially modified and is only used specifically for home to school transport. The vehicle s recorded mileage, as observed on inspection, was consistent with that. The committee considered that, but for the exemption provisions that were about to be repealed, application could have been made to licence the vehicle when it was still within the age range permitted under the policy and in all probability such an application would have been granted and renewal permitted until ten years of age. Refusal would serve no purpose other than to deny passengers of a much needed specialist service. The committee therefore concluded that the applicant had made a sound case for departure from the vehicle specification Policy in relation to this specific application and they granted a Private Hire Vehicle License. The Committee would not anticipate application being made to re-licence the vehicle to be used beyond the age of ten years. Mr Munden had promised that this is the only purpose that the vehicle will be used for should a license be granted. Members would wish to review their decision should this prove not to be the case in practice. Members

21 considered that a suitable sign ought to be affixed to the vehicle denoting its use for home-school transport and imposed a condition aimed at achieving this. Chair s Signature

22 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 3 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 120.1/08 Agenda item no: 6 Agenda title APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVERS LICENCE FROM AN APPLICANT WHO HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ASPECTS OF THE FIT AND PROPER PERSON POLICY APPLICANT- PHILLIP JOHN LACEY Findings of Fact The Applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a short-term (3 months) drivers licence. The appropriateness of his being licensed in the longer term depended on the outcome of the usual assessment of his medical fitness Decision That Phillip John Lacey be granted a Private Hire Driver s License for a period of 3 months. That upon seeking renewal of that licence he be required to provide to the Council the result of a medical assessment made in line with the Council s fit and proper person policy. Reason for Decision Members noted that Mr Lacy only sought a license so as to enable him to continue to work as a driver in a limited way under a home to school contract. He promised that he would not use the license to do any other form of work. Members noted the very limited amount of driving that he did and that refusal of his application would risk the continuation of a very important service. He was clearly very familiar with his one and only route and had a significant amount of professional driving experience with a respected employer. In these particular circumstances he ahd demonstrated that he could be treated as an exception to the usual expectation of a pass in the DSA and Knowledge Tests without thereby imperilling the purpose for which those aspects of the policy were in place. However he had not persuaded the council that he could be excepted from the medical fitness aspect of the fit and proper person policy. It was important that the council be satisfied about this if he were to continue to provide a service of this nature to the travelling public, even a limited service such as had been described. The Committee would therefore grant the initial licence for a short duration only, sufficient time to enable him to be medically examined. If the outcome of the medical were satisfactory then renewal could proceed in the normal way, under

23 officer authority and without reference to this Committee for a hearing. The Committee wished to emphasise that its decision to make an exception in this case depended heavily on the assurances provided about the limited use to which this licence would be put and the public interest in acting so as to enable that service to continue. Should it transpire that the licensee extended his role into other areas of hire and reward work then, unless he had first provided proof of pass of the knowledge and DSA tests, the Committee would expect a report to come to it to enable it to review the continuation of the licence. Chair s Signature

24 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 4 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 121.1/08 Agenda item no: 7 Agenda title APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVERS LICENCE FROM AN APPLICANT WHO HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH ASPECTS OF THE FIT AND PROPER PERSON POLICY APPLICANT- PETER HENSHALL Findings of Fact Decision That Peter Henshall be granted a Private Hire Driver s License for a period of 3 months. That upon seeking renewal of that licence he be required to provide to the Council the result of a medical assessment made in line with the Council s fit and proper person policy. Reason for Decision Members noted that Mr Henshall only sought a licence so as to enable him to continue to work as a driver in a limited way under a home to school contract. He promised that he would not use the licence to do any other form of work. Members noted the very limited amount of driving that he did and that refusal of his application would risk the continuation of a very important service. He was clearly very familiar with his one and only route and had a significant amount of professional driving experience with a respected employer. In these particular circumstances he ahd demonstrated that he could be treated as an exception to the usual expectation of a pass in the DSA and Knowledge Tests without thereby imperilling the purpose for which those aspects of the policy were in place. However he had not persuaded the council that he could be excepted from the medical fitness aspect of the fit and proper person policy. It was important that the council be satisfied about this if he were to continue to provide a service of this nature to the travelling public, even a limited service such as had been described. The Committee would therefore grant the initial licence for a short duration only, sufficient time to enable him to be medically examined. If the outcome of the medical were satisfactory then renewal could proceed in the normal way, under officer authority and without reference to this Committee for a hearing. The Committee wished to emphasise that its decision to make an exception in this case depended heavily on the assurances provided about the limited

25 use to which this licence would be put and the public interest in acting so as to enable that service to continue. Should it transpire that the licensee extended his role into other areas of hire and reward work then, unless he had first provided proof of pass of the knowledge and DSA tests, the Committee would expect a report to come to it to enable it to review the continuation of the licence. Chair s Signature

26 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 5 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 123.1/08 EXEMPT Agenda item no: 9 Agenda title APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER S LICENCE - APPLICANT AMC Findings of Fact On 6 th March 2008 AMC was found guilty of drink/driving and failing to produce a specimen by Bristol Magistrates Court. Decision That the application for the grant of a Private Hire Driver s Licence in respect of AMC be refused on the grounds that he had not satisfied the Council that he was a fit and proper person to hold such a license. Reason for Decision AMC has been convicted. AMC has had his say before the Committee and what he said was not credible in material respects. The Council is not a Court of Appeal. The Council cannot go behind the convictions. AMC had only recently had his DVLA License returned (December 2007). Council Policy stated that a period of at least 5 years should elapse after the restoration of the DVLA License before a Private Hire Driver License is granted. AMC had shown no basis on which the committee could reasonably depart from its policy. It was for him to prove that he is a fit and proper person and, having regard to his convictions and the relevant policy he had failed to do so. His application should therefore be refused. Chair s Signature

27 BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL APPENDIX 6 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROTECTION SUB-COMMITTEE B HELD ON 22 nd JANUARY 2008 PSP 124.1/08 EXEMPT Agenda item no: 10 Agenda title PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER - RECENT FINDING OF GUILT AT BRISTOL MAGISTRATES COURT LICENCE HOLDER OMS Findings of Fact OMS had been found guilty of unlawful plying for hire and no insurance. OMS knew that he was not allowed to pick passengers up off the street but that they had to be pre-booked Decision (i) That the Private Hire Driver s License held by OMS be revoked. Reason for Decision Members considered that OMS had been well aware of the law relating to Private Hire driving. He had signed to say he had received a copy of the conditions. He had been articulate before the committee and in conversation with his passengers in seeking to make the pick up safe as he had referred to it. In making that call he had been trying to cover his tracks. The Committee considered he had received the conditions with his licence and that he knew full well that only licensed hackney carriage drivers were permitted to pick up passengers off the street without pre-booking. To have been discovered breaking the law so quickly after having been granted his first licence was a real cause for concern. OMS had asked the committee to take into account his financial difficulties and except him from the policy on that basis. This was not a factor that was relevant in considering the public interest. The issue here was the public interest, including the insurance position as well as the protection of the livelihood of those members of the public who are lawfully allowed to ply for hire and whose income was directly affected by this activity. The committee took into account that these were the only convictions of which the Council was aware that OMS had committed and the level of penalty imposed by the Justices when sentencing him. In this case having regard to the Council s adopted policy OMS should be off the road for a period of at least six months. For that reason his licence was revoked.

28 Chair s Signature