Agenda and minutes

The Democratic Services Officer read out the procedure.

Apologies were received from Councillor Mark Shelford, for whom Councillor Deirdre Horstmann substituted.

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.

The minutes of the meeting of 8^th September 2016 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:

“the Committee 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, RESOLVES that the public shall 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 the Committee 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, hat the public shall be excluded from the meeting for agenda items 8 and 9 and that the reporting of this part 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.   

The Chair will draw attention to the procedure to be followed for the next two items of business.

Members note the procedure to be followed for the next two items of business.

Mr JMO confirmed that he had received and understood the procedure to be followed for this hearing.

The Senior Public Protection Officer presented the report. Members noted that a valid DBS certificate had not been received from the licence holder, despite several requests from Licensing for him to supply one. The DBS web portal had confirmed that a valid certificate had been issued to Mr JMO in March this year. A statement from Mr JMO was circulated to Members, and the hearing was adjourned to allow them time to study this.

After the hearing reconvened, Mr JMO said that there was little he could add to his written statement except to reiterate his apologies. The problem was that he had changed address and was not receiving post from his old address. He had applied for another DBS certificate, which he would forward as soon as he received it. He assured the Sub-Committee that the certificate would show that he had no convictions. In his closing statement he once again apologised for the trouble he had caused.

Following a further adjournment the Sub-Committee RESOLVED that Mr JMO continues to be a fit and proper person to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence.

Reasons

Members have had to determine what action to take against the holder of a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence who has failed to provide a valid DBS certificate. In doing so they took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council’s Policy.

Members had to decide whether the licensee was a fit and proper person to continue to hold a licence taking into account all of the circumstances.

Members took account of the licensee’s written statement and his oral representations and balanced these against the failure to produce a DBS certificate.

Members noted that on renewal of his licence in February 2016, Mr J M O’s licence was issued subject to the caveat, which was expressly stated on the face of the licence, that “to drive a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire vehicle in the Bath and North East Somerset area, subject to the conditions attached hereto and a satisfactory police check and DVLA check as appropriate”. Despite reminder letters sent to him by the Licensing office on the 16^th June and 5^th July, he has failed to provide the certificate. Members noted that the DBS certificate was issued to Mr J M O on 10^th March.

Mr J M O simply confirmed what he had put in his statement and apologised for the inconvenience caused. He confirmed he is now settled and on top of his affairs. He assured members that the DBS check would come back clear.

Members noted that Mr J M O was first granted a licence in 1998 and that there had been no complaints against him regarding his previous conduct or behaviour. Having heard Mr J M O’s representations Members are satisfied that this was a genuine  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

The applicant confirmed that he had received and understood the procedure to be followed for the hearing.

The Senior Public Protection Officer presented the report and circulated a DBS certificate in respect of Mr RGW, a statement from him and a reference given on his behalf. The hearing was adjourned to allow Members time to study these documents.

After the hearing was reconvened, the applicant said that he did not wish to make a statement. He also did not wish to make a closing statement.

Following a further adjournment the Sub-Committee RESOLVED that Mr RGW was a fit and proper person to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence.

Reasons

Members have had to determine an application for a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence. In doing so they took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council’s Policy.

Members had to decide whether the applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a licence taking into account all the circumstances.

Members took account of the applicant’s written statement, reference and his oral representations and balanced these against the information disclosed on his DBS certificate.

The applicant simply referred to his written statement and had nothing further to add.

Members found the matters were historic and had taken place when Mr R G W was a juvenile. Members noted that the applicant had remained conviction free for the period anticipated in the policy. For these reasons they therefore find him a fit and proper person to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence.

The Sub-Committee will return to open session.

The Sub-Committee returned to open session.

Members noted the procedure to be followed for the next item of business.

Applicant: IV League Ltd, represented by Christopher Bromley (DPS and Manager)

Other Persons: Anthony Williams and Charlotte Gibson.

The parties indicated that they had received and understood the procedure to be followed for this hearing.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) presented the report.

Members noted that:

(i)  this was an application for a new premises licence to replace an existing premises licence, in order to extend the licensed area of the premises to include an outdoors roof terrace;

(ii)  the premises was situated in the Cumulative Impact Area and that therefore there was a rebuttable presumption that the application should be refused, unless the applicant could demonstrate that the operation of the premises would not add significantly to the cumulative impact already being experienced;

(iii)  the Public Protection Officer clarified typographical errors at paragraph 5.2 of the report regarding the opening hours for licensable activities permitted under the current licence, viz. the current starting hour for the Performance of Recorded Music (indoors only), Other Entertainment within the Act (indoors only) and the opening hour should be 08:00 on Mondays to Saturdays, not 10:00, and the terminal hour for the Performance of Recorded Music (indoors only) on Sundays should be 22:30, not 02:00. The Public Protection Officer circulated a copy of the report showing the revisions to the typographical errors, to all persons present at the hearing;

(iv)  by the provisions of the Deregulation Act 2015 no licence permission was required for any playing of recorded music between 08:00 and 23:00 on any day on premises authorised to sell alcohol for consumption on the premises, provided that the audience does not exceed 500;

(v)  Other Persons had made representations relating to the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance;

(vi)  there had been no representations from the Responsible Authorities.

Mr Bromley stated the case for the applicant. He explained that the reason for the application was to allow alcohol to be served from a ‘shed’ on the outside roof terrace. This had been done for two years, until he had been advised recently that this was not permitted under the current premises licence. He would be content for the hours for regulated activities on the terrace to be reduced from the hours currently applying to the rest of the premises. There had been a bar on the terrace since 2008. The terrace had been a derelict roof top, but had been converted into a seating area with benches and canopies over it. The terrace was used as a smoking area, and the extent of cover had had to be reduced to allow it to be legally employed for this purpose. He addressed the licensing objectives.

Public safety

A bar on the terrace allows the movement of people within the premises to be controlled. Without it there would be only one point of sale, and there would be a continuous movement of people up and down the stairs to and from a bar on a lower floor.

Crime and disorder

There  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.