Agenda and draft minutes

The Democratic Services Officer drew attention to the Emergency Evacuation 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.

(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 4.4 Appendix 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 Officer or a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

There were none.

There was none.

The Sub-Committee RESOLVED to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 12th February 2026 and they were duly signed by the Chair.

The Chair referenced the procedure that would be followed during the course of the meeting.

Those that were present confirmed that they had received and understood the licensing procedure.

The Sub-Committee is asked to consider passing the following resolution:

“the Sub-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.   

The members of the Sub-Committee agreed that they were 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.

It was RESOLVED that the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items 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.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) introduced the report to the Sub-Committee. He explained that the licensee had voluntarily ceased driving their licensed vehicle after reporting their heart attack to Licensing whilst further medical investigations were undertaken.

He explained that he had recently received confirmation from the licensee’s consultant that the licensee had passed the required exercise and functional tests with regard to their LV ejection fraction. He added though that their GP was now seeking clarification on hospital records from January that showed the licensee has mitral regurgitation.

The licensee addressed the Sub-Committee and explained that they were now taking medication to control their condition.

Councillor Toby Simon asked the licensee if they suffered from breathlessness.

The licensee replied that they did not, had carried out a fitness test on a treadmill and walked around 5,000 steps a day on average.

After a short recess the Sub-Committee reconvened and asked to view the latest report from the licensee’s consultant.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) circulated the report to the Sub-Committee via email.

Councillor Simon summarised the report to those present and explained that it said the licensee has no significant abnormalities and has a normal valve function.

The licensee then shared with the Sub-Committee a further letter from their consultant that stated that they have no significant valve abnormalities.

Decision & Reasons

Members have had to consider whether or not the licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold their combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence in the light of a medical diagnosis. In doing so Members took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council Policy.

The Licensing Officer updated Members that confirmation was received yesterday from the licensee’s consultant that they had passed the exercise and LV ejection fraction tests in respect of the heart attack, however a few days ago their GP reported that hospital records revealed mitral regurgitation. Members asked to see the correspondence from the consultant dated 24/02/26 and noted that it indicated “there were no significant valvular abnormalities”.

Members heard from the licensee in oral representations who indicated that their consultant had given them the all clear.

Members noted that the licensee had reported their heart attack to licensing and had voluntarily ceased driving licensed vehicles whilst further medical investigations were undertaken, for which they commended him.  They also noted that the consultant had given the all clear in respect of the 3 Group 2 DVLA Standards required to be met for someone who has suffered a heart attack, before they could resume driving as a licensed BANES driver, namely:

  i.  After a minimum of six weeks from the start of diagnosis the licensee has passed the required exercise and functional tests; and

  ii.  has an LV ejection fraction of at least 40%; and

  iii.  has no other disqualifying condition.

Taking account of the medical diagnosis and recent correspondence from the licensee’s consultant, members are satisfied that the Group 2 DVLA standards  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) introduced the report to the Sub-Committee. He explained that they were being asked to consider whether the licensee remains fit and proper to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers licence issued by this authority.

The licensee addressed the Sub-Committee and stated that the reason for the late submission of their MOT certificate in September 2025 was due to being on holiday. They apologised and said that they were not very computer literate and that they would normally ask their company to forward documents to Licensing.

The licensee stated that they would do their best to submit their documents on time this coming year.

Councillor Toby Simon suggested that as an MOT could be carried out a month before expiry this could be done prior to going on holiday if the licensee had similar plans for later in the year.

The licensee explained that they had no previous issues when they had been able to submit documentation in person. They thanked the Sub-Committee for listening to them today.

Decision & Reasons

Members have had to consider whether or not the licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold their combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence in the light of failures to comply with the conditions of their Private Hire Vehicle Licence relating to MOT certificates. In doing so Members took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council Policy.

Members heard from the licensee in oral representations who indicated that they went away for the whole of September last year which is why they did not get their MOT certificate in in time. They indicated that they struggle with IT and did not used to have any issues when they could deliver certificates by hand. They said that they normally ask their operator to send paperwork in for them now. They will ensure that they get the paperwork in on time this year and they plan to retire after this. They indicated that they enjoy the job.

Members noted that compliance with the conditions relating to MOT certificates is vital so that the Council can be assured that the safety of the public when travelling in a BANES licensed vehicle is not compromised. Indeed, compliance with all licence conditions is of the utmost importance.

Members noted that the licensee had held their licence with BANES for nearly 26 years and during that time there had been no complaints from members of the public in relation to their conduct.

On balance, Members find that the licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold their combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence, but they issue a warning to the licensee that:

1. They must comply with the conditions on their licences as they are an important safeguard to ensure the safety of the travelling public.
2. They must re-read and understand the conditions on their licences.
3. They must set up arrangements which will ensure that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) introduced the report to the Sub-Committee. He explained that they were being asked to consider whether the licensee remains fit and proper to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers licence issued by this authority.

The Chair stated that he was willing to accept the two additional character references that had been presented by the licensee at the beginning of the meeting.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) informed the Sub-Committee that 12 character references had also been circulated to them since the agenda pack had been published.

Councillor Toby Simon asked if the age and relationship status of the two complainants who had provided statements under Section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 could be shared with the Sub-Committee.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) replied that they were aged 18 and 21 and were friends through their work.

Councillor Simon asked if Licensing could confirm that they had an address for them on the night in question.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) replied that they did and that this was in Whitley, near Melksham.

Councillor Simon asked how far and how long it would take to walk from Atworth, where the complainants had halted their journey, to their address in Whitley.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) replied that the distance was around 1.5 miles along country lanes and would take 32 minutes to walk. He added that the complainants had stated that as this was late in the evening they had to use their mobile phones to light the way and would therefore take longer in time.

The Chair explained to the licensee that the Sub-Committee were today going to concentrate on the three separate allegations of falling asleep while driving.

The licensee addressed the Sub-Committee and said that on the evening in question in November 2025 they had started their last job from Orange Grove taxi rank around 23:00 / 23:30 and this was to take a male and female passenger to Atworth.

The licensee stated that both passengers had had a lot to drink and argued for most of the journey. They added that if they were to have fallen asleep on this journey they would have surely crashed as there is little room on the narrow lanes.

The licensee explained their work pattern to the Sub-Committee. They said that they begin their first driving shift at 1:00pm until 4.30pm, then they come home for their dinner then they go to bed and sleep. At 8:30pm they wake up and start their 2nd shift at 9:00pm; during the weekdays they finish at 12-12.30am and at weekends the latest they work is 1.30am. 

The licensee stated that they have always worked in the evenings, having previously worked in a number of restaurants.

The licensee said that they deny all the allegations of falling asleep while driving and considered themselves to be physically fit. They added that they were always helpful to their passengers and would not put them or themselves at risk as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.