Minutes:
Members were asked to consider and determine an application for a private hire driver
licence, from an applicant who had previously been refused by this authority in 2007, 2008 and 2009.Applicant - 086879 did have a licence granted in April 2010 with this authority, but this was then revoked in 2012. The driver also had relevant convictions which meant he currently did not meet current Transport Policy.
Applicant - 086879 attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation.
Committee papers and reports had been provided to all relevant parties prior to the meeting.
The report detailed the following:
- A copy of the Applicant – 086879’s application which contained a DVLA check code, showing two live endorsements for ‘exceeding the speed limit on a public road’ totalling 6 live DVLA points.
- A copy of a summary transcript of an interview with Applicant – 086879 and Licensing Officers.
The Chair introduced everyone present and explained the procedure to be followed during the hearing.
The Committee understood that the matter before them was to determine an application for a private hire driver licence, from an applicant who had previously been refused a licence by this authority in 2007, 2008 and 2009, and who had a licence granted in April 2010, that was subsequently revoked in 2012, as detailed in the Committee report and appendices.
The Committee heard that an application for a private hire driver licence had been received from Applicant – 086879, who had two live DVLA licence endorsements for exceeding the speed limit on a public road, totalling 6 live DVLA penalty points.
The Committee were told that an enhanced Disclosure & Barring Service (DBS) certificate displayed a conviction of ‘driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol’ on 19th October 2014; Applicant – 086879 was convicted of the offence on 3rd November 2014, and was disqualified from driving for 36 months (reduced by 9 months as a course was completed), fined £110 and made to pay a victim surcharge of £20.
The Committee heard that Applicant – 086879 was interviewed in relation to his application on Monday 28th October 2024, when Applicant – 086879 was asked about his conviction for the offence of driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol in October 2014, which he had declared within his application. The Committee were told that Applicant – 086879 admitted that he was speeding as he was overtaking another vehicle that had overtaken his vehicle.
The Committee were told that Applicant – 086879 was also asked during the interview about his conviction for the offence of driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol in December 2012; he said he had been drinking at a friend’s house and then drove his vehicle.
The Committee were advised that Applicant – 086879 told officers during the interview that he did not have an alcohol addiction and was just careless; since these offences Applicant – 086879 no longer associated with the same crowd of people and was now a reformed person.
The Committee heard that Applicant – 086879 was asked why he did not declare any of his licence refusals or his licence previously held with Berick-upon-Tweed Council on his application form; he said he did not realise he had to declare his refusals and must not have read the application properly.
The Committee were told that during Applicant – 086879’s appointments with licensing administration officers, it was noted that he seemed disengaged and was watching his phone during the appointment; when asked about this Applicant – 086879 said that he could not remember this but thought that his actions may have been misinterpreted.
The Committee noted that Applicant – 086879 was previously refused a licence by the Licensing Committee in November 2007, September 2008 and April 2009; none of which were declared on Applicant – 086879’s application form.
The Committee further noted that Applicant – 086879 was granted a licence by the Licensing Committee on 27th April 2010, with a warning as to his future conduct, and subsequently given a further warning by the Committee on 21st December 2010, as he had received a speeding conviction within the first 6 months of being granted his licence.
The Committee heard that on 20th January 2012, licensing officers were advised that Applicant – 086879 had been convicted of driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol for which he was fined £250, ordered to pay costs of £85, pay a victim surcharge of £15 and disqualified from driving for 14 months, and had also been convicted of possessing a controlled drug Class B (cannabis/cannabis resin) for which he was fined £25. The Committee noted that on 21st February 2012, the Committee revoked Applicant – 086879’s licence.
The Committee were told that Applicant – 086879 was refused a licence by Wolverhampton Council due to his previous convictions, however he did not declare this on his application form.
The Committee were also told that Applicant – 086879 declared on his application form that he had held a PCV licence for 14 years.
The Committee and Applicant – 086879 were given an opportunity to ask questions of the officer.
Applicant – 086879 told the Committee that he had been driving a large PSV vehicle for ten years, and that despite previously being immature, careless and reckless, he was now a changed person with responsibilities including a mortgage and children, and that he was honest.
The Committee asked questions of Applicant – 086879. In response to questioning about his speeding offences in 2022 and 2023, Applicant – 086879 told the Committee that he did not see the speed van, and was not driving dangerously or carelessly, it just happened. The Committee noted that Applicant – 086879 stated that he was caught off-guard and was not paying attention whilst transporting a child with a passenger assistant, and that he would have slowed down if he had seen the speed camera.
In response to a query from the Committee about Applicant – 086879 PSV licence, Mrs Maloney-Kelly explained that Applicant – 086879 was permitted to drive mini-busses and could work for a private hire operator, but that he did not hold a licence with a local authority.
When asked by the Committee if he drank alcohol, Applicant – 086879 confirmed that he did not, and had not for approximately eight years.
The Committee was given an opportunity to ask questions Applicant – 086879, with Applicant – 086879 speaking last.
Members had regard to the Committee papers, which had been circulated prior to the hearing and presented to them, in addition to the oral submissions made by the officers and Applicant – 086879, in response to the Committee’s questions.
Having carefully considered the written documentation before them and in reaching their decision, the members had regard to the provisions of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. The Committee also had regard to the Council’s Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Licensing Policy 2021 – 2026 (“the Policy”).
The Committee noted that under section 51 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Committee shall not grant a driver’s licence unless they are satisfied that the applicant is a fit and proper person. When determining this matter, the Committee considered this application on its merits.
The Committee had regard to Appendix E(c) of the Policy; “A licence will normally be refused if an applicant has more than one conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol”.
The Committee members were not satisfied that they would allow people for whom they care to enter a vehicle with Applicant – 086879 due to his previous convictions for the offence of driving a motor vehicle with excess alcohol in 2012 and 2014. The Committee did not feel that there were any exceptional reasons before them to depart from the Policy. On the contrary, the Committee felt that Applicant – 086879’s two speeding offences in 2022 and 2023, and his failure to declare information within his application only affirmed their concerns that Applicant – 086879 was not a fit and proper person.
The Committee were particularly concerned that rather than comprehending that he should not break the speed limit, Applicant – 086879 admitted to the Committee that he was not paying attention whilst transporting a child, and that he would have slowed down had he seen the speed camera. This was not the attitude nor the manner of driving that the Committee expect of licenced drivers, nor applicants wishing to become licenced.
Ultimately, the Committee did not believe that Applicant – 086879 was a fit and proper person to hold a private hire vehicle drivers’ licence. The Committee were unanimously satisfied that Applicant – 086879’s application should therefore be refused.
RESOLVED that Applicant – 086879’s application for a Combined Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s licence be refused for the reasons as detailed above.