Agenda item

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

The Senior Public Protection Officer summarised the report. Mr Z M had received two convictions during the term of his Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence, so had been referred to the Sub-Committee in accordance with the Council’s Policy. Mr Z M had notified him in July 2015 that he had been charged with two offences arising from the same incident. He had stated that he had initially intended to plead not guilty to both of them, but on legal advice had pleaded guilty to a lesser offence in place of the first charge, of which he had been convicted, and that the other charge had been dismissed. However, a DVLA report in respect of Mr Z M showed endorsements for two offences arising from the incident. The Senior Public Protection Officer provided Members with copies of the DVLA report. (A statement from Mr Z M had been circulated with the agenda report). The meeting was adjourned to allow Members time to read the DVLA report.

After the meeting reconvened, Mr Z M stated his case. He maintained that he had not committed the offences, and that it was not his vehicle that had been involved in the incident. He explained that he had thought that he had only been convicted of a single offence, because no penalty had been imposed in respect of the second charge. Mr Z M was questioned by Members. He did not wish to make a closing statement.

Following an adjournment, it was RESOLVED to issue Mr Z M with a stern warning in relation to his conduct.

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 obtained convictions during the course of his 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. 

Consideration of this matter had been deferred from the meeting of the LSC on 17^th November, on the request of the licensee.

In making a determination Members took account of the licensee’s oral representations, his statement, character references and balanced these against the information provided by the DVLA.

In making his representations, the licensee stated he had originally pleaded not guilty to the offences because he had no knowledge of the incident and believed the whole matter was based on a case of mistaken identity. Whilst he was prepared for the matter to go to trial, in order to reduce the risk of damage to himself, and to guarantee his personal freedom, he pleaded guilty on legal advice. 

In making their determination Members were aware that they were not there to re-open the conviction but rather to take account of the licensee’s oral and written representations and determine whether or not the Licensee remained a fit and proper person. Further they were mindful that each case should be decided on its own merits and that they may depart from their policy where there are reasons for doing so.  Members noted from the Policy, that a serious view will be taken of any conviction obtained by a licensee whilst acting in the course of their employment and where there has been a conviction for a serious motoring offence, for example failing to stop and report an accident, a licensee is expected to remain conviction free for a period of 5 years.

Whilst taking a dim view of the offences Members noted that:

1. No complaints had been recorded against the licensee since he first obtained a licence in 2004.
2. He had reported the charges brought against him to the Licensing Team.
3. The apparent leniency of sentence imposed by the court – the licensee was given a moderate level of fine and 7 penalty points for the careless driving offence and no separate penalty for the offence of failing to stop and report an accident.

On balance Members find Mr M is a fit and proper person to continue holding a licence however, they issued Mr M with a stern warning that should he appear before the LSC again in relation to his conduct, he was at risk of having his license revoked.