Agenda and minutes

The Democratic Services Officer read out the procedure.

There were none.

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officeror a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

There were none.

There was none.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting on 9^th September 2014 be approved as a correct record and be signed by the Chair(person).

The procedure for the meeting was explained.

The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:

“that having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, in accordance with the provisions of Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business and the reporting of the meeting be prevented under Section 100A(5A) because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, as amended.   

RESOLVED that, having been satisfied that the public interest would be better served by not disclosing relevant information, in accordance with the provisions of Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business because of the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, as amended.

The Sub-Committee considered the report which sought determination of whether Mr CDC was suitable to continue to hold a combined hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence.

Mr CDC was not present and officers had not heard from him in respect of his attendance.  The Senior Public Protection Officer stated that he had personally delivered the report and notified Mr CDC of the meeting.  He confirmed that Mr CDC had moved address several times and was now of no fixed abode.  Mr CDC had attended an interview with officers and was aware his case would go before the Sub-Committee.

The Senior Legal Adviser referred Members to the procedure in circumstances where a party fails to turn up.  Members considered that Mr CDC had been made aware of the meeting and appropriate procedures had been followed.  They considered that having received two complaints of dangerous driving, a formal caution for assault, failure to disclose the caution and pending criminal proceedings for three alleged offences of assaulting a police officer and having attended Sub-Committee in April of this year, they should go ahead in Mr CDC’s absence without delay.

The procedure for the meeting was explained.

The Public Protection Officer outlined the circumstances of the case.  He explained that Mr CDC had attended the office for interview on 28^th August 2014 and circulated a copy of the contemporaneous notes of this meeting.  Members considered these notes in evidence.

The Senior Public Protection Officer outlined the circumstances of the incident of dangerous driving on 29^th May 2014 and stated that having seen the dangerous manoeuvre he had then passed the taxi in question as traffic had slowed down and confirmed that Mr CDC was the driver.

With respect to the information from the police regarding the caution for assault and criminal proceedings for three alleged offences of assaulting a police officer, it was confirmed that Mr CDC had not notified the authority.  The Senior Legal Adviser stated that Mr CDC had originally been in custody but then been given unconditional bail by the Bath Magistrates’ Court until the adjourned hearing in February 2015.

The Senior Public Protection Officer stated that the police had concerns regarding Mr CDC’s alcohol consumption as this had been a factor in both incidents.  He was also aware from other drivers in the trade that Mr CDC had a drink problem. 

Member adjourned to consider their decision.

RESOLVED that the combined hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence in respect of Mr CDC be revoked with immediate effect.

Reasons for decision

Members have had to determine whether to take any action against a licensee following two complaints of dangerous driving, a formal caution for assault and pending criminal proceedings for three alleged offences of assaulting a police officer.  In doing so they have taken account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Human Rights Act 1998, the Council’s Policy and case law.

Members noted that case law stated hearsay evidence is admissible, there was no necessity for there to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.