Agenda item

Consideration of ‘Fit and Proper’ - 22/00409/TAXI

Minutes:

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

 

He outlined the key points from the report.

 

The Chairman asked the driver to address them on why he believed he should remain considered as fit and proper to hold his licence.

 

The driver stated that he had held a licence for nearly 19 years and that during that time his vehicles had always been in a legal state. He said that he was not always the best with paperwork and apologised for the oversights that had occurred.

 

The Chairman commented that he would like to understand how there had possibly been any gap in his insurance cover.

 

The driver said that he had been assured that insurance was in place at all times and that possibly it had been due to a change in providers.

 

The Chairman asked if he could explain the adjustment to the policy that had been identified in the report.

 

The driver replied that this could have been when he asked for a named person to be removed from the policy as this was costing him extra money. He assured the Sub-Committee again that he would not have ever driven without insurance.

 

The Chairman stated that the failure to supply documents to the Licensing team had happened on a number of occasions and he asked if the driver could explain why.

 

The driver replied that in previous years his ex-wife had helped him with this aspect of the process.

 

The Lead Officer, Licensing addressed the Sub-Committee. He said that in his view there was a discrepancy in the insurance cover and advised the driver of the need to make sure his documentation is fully up to date at all times.

 

The Team Leader, Legal Services addressed the Sub-Committee. She explained that within the papers for the hearing they had received an email from the driver’s insurance broker that states that he did always have insurance cover in place.

 

The Chairman asked the driver if he felt he had given the Sub-Committee as much information as he could regarding his case.

 

The driver replied that he had.

 

Decision and Reasons

 

Members have had to consider whether or not the Licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold his combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence in the light of failures to comply with the conditions of his Private Hire Vehicle Licence relating to insurance 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 he had been a taxi driver for 19 years, he explained that as far as he was concerned, he had always done what was required of him legally but acknowledged that he could do better with his administrative responsibilities.

 

He accepted that it was his responsibility to comply with the terms of his licences and understood the importance of these obligations. He assured Members that this would not happen again and apologised for what had happened.

 

Members noted that there was an e-mail from the Licensee’s insurance broker that indicated there was always a policy of insurance in place however, Members also noted that this did not explain the gap of 38 days between insurance policies.

 

Members noted that compliance with the conditions relating to MOT and insurance 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 his combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence for 19 years and had no complaints against him from Members of the public.

 

Members find the Licensee to be credible and that he held a genuine belief that there was continuity of insurance cover, given the explanation from the insurance broker. There was however a lack of clarity regarding the 38-day period between insurance policies.

 

With all of that in mind, on balance, Members find that the Licensee is fit and proper to continue to hold the combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence, but they issue a warning to the Licensee that:

 

  1. He must ensure that he has continuity of insurance and MOT cover in respect of his vehicle(s).

 

  1. He must comply with the conditions on his licences as they are an important safeguard to ensure the safety of the travelling public.

 

  1. He must take care to ensure that he completes his documentation related to his BANES licences with care and accuracy, if in doubt he should seek assistance from licensing.

 

  1. If he comes before the Licensing Sub-Committee again, against this background, there is a risk of revocation of his licence.

 

Supporting documents: