Agenda item

The driver confirmed that he had read the papers for the meeting which had been sent to him.  A printed copy of the agenda papers was provided for the driver, and he was then given time to read through these with the aid of an interpreter.  He then confirmed that he understood the licensing procedure and was happy to go ahead with the hearing.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) presented the report to the Sub-Committee.  He explained that they were being asked to determine the driver’s fitness to continue to hold a combined hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence.

The driver addressed the Sub-Committee and referred to the littering offence that he had been accused of.  He stated that the time of the CCTV of the incident was not consistent with the time stated on the letter sent to him by the Council.  The Licensing Officer confirmed that the fine for the littering offence had been paid in full.

The driver stated that he is a good taxi driver and has received no complaints in relation to his work.  He stated that he had previously worked for a school in Italy.  He explained that he had been concerned by the behaviour of the child he was transporting as she had pulled the escort’s hair and kicked her, she had also kicked the chair and punched the windows.  He felt that it would be unsafe to drive while this behaviour continued which is why he made the comments to the child as set out in the report.  No concern was expressed by the escort or the parent at the time.

He then spoke about the incident where he had been issued penalty points for waiting at a taxi rank and stated that this had been a mistake and had been unintentional.

When stopped by the Civil Enforcement Officer regarding a littering offence the driver stated that he had been angry at the time and had apologised for his behaviour.  This had been a mistake and he did not feel that it was a serious criminal offence.

Cllr Steve Hedges asked whether the driver felt it was acceptable to raise his voice to a child and to say what he had said.  The driver stated that he had been trying to calm the child down and to assist her escort.  He noted that there was also a language barrier which could have added to the confusion.  He had concerns about being able to drive safely due to the behaviour of the child. 

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) noted that the driver’s behaviour had caused the escort to make a complaint and report him.  He also referred to the safeguarding course which the driver had subsequently attended.

The driver stated that he had not understood everything on the safeguarding course due the language barriers.  He did not remember much about the course.

Cllr Toby Simon asked the driver what type of work he was doing now.  The driver explained that he is working as a private hire and hackney carriage taxi driver but is not carrying out school runs.

The Chair stated that in his role the driver is employed to take people from A to B and that it is not his role to discipline passengers.  He asked whether it would have been better to have pulled over and waited for the child to calm down.  The driver stated that, on reflection, it would have been better to do this.  However, he had acted as he believed was right at the time and stated that his intentions had been good.

The driver summed up by stating that he is a very good taxi driver but sometimes makes mistakes.  He is generally patient with people, loves his job, enjoys helping people and wants to continue as a taxi driver.

Decisions and Reasons

Members have had to consider whether or not the licensee is fit and proper to continue to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence following a complaint regarding his conduct on a home to school journey. In doing so Members took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and Council’s Policy.

Members reminded themselves that each case is considered on its own merits.

The licensee was assisted at Committee by an interpreter.

Members had read the written accounts and representations made by the licensee contained in the agenda reports pack and they heard from him and his interpreter in oral representations. The had also had regard to the totality of the reports pack.

The licensee informed Members that he had been doing school runs for 5 years. In relation to the incident concerning the child on 05.07.23 the licensee said that a teacher had been chasing the child around the school yard for 10 to 15 minutes as the child did not want to go home. He accepted opening his car window at this point and saying to the child “…if you don’t get into the car now, I am going’. He accepted raising his voice because the child was far away but said he did not yell. The licensee said the child ignored him and carried on doing what she was doing. The licensee accepted that he stopped the car on the way home, because the child was agitated and started to kick the doors and windows, which was too stressful for him to drive, and he was concerned for the safety of his passengers. Once he stopped the car, he went to the passenger door next to the child, opened it and said to her “Please stop, if you don’t stop you stay here in the middle of the forest with the wolves.” After which the child had cried then for 10 or 20 seconds.

The Licensee accepted that about 4 or 5 months before that, the child had been even more agitated in his vehicle, he had stopped his vehicle and opened the passenger door where the same child was seated and said: “if you don’t stop you stay here, and I don’t take you home.” He could not recall if he mentioned wolves on that occasion. The licensee’s account in writing was that the school escort had commended him on his actions on that occasion and said that the child’s mother had endorsed his action as well. The licensee acknowledged that the child and School Escort were upset by the July incident. The licensee’s explanation for his conduct was to try and calm an unsafe situation in his car that was putting other passengers at risk. The licensee said he understands that it is not normal to raise his voice to a child, but the child had repeatedly been asked to stop and did not.

The licensee indicated to Members that he has a diploma for dealing with vulnerable people and handed up a copy of his Operatore Socio Sanitario which seems to be equivalent to a Health and Social Care Assistant qualification.

The licensee acknowledged that he had attended the Safeguarding Training but did not recall much about the course. 

In relation to the littering incident on 28.02.23 the licensee accepted that it was him in the CCTV footage at the layby where the offence took place but said that there was a discrepancy between the time on the footage and the time on the fixed penalty notice. Licensing had identified that the fixed penalty notice had been paid.

In relation to the incident in 17.07.23 where the licensee was observed at the Orange Grove taxi rank not wearing his BANES licensing ID badge, the licensee indicated that part of the lanyard was broken which is why he was not wearing it.

Members noted from Annex E of the report that there was an account from Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator (SENCO) who was present with the School Escort and child at school on 05.07.23. She reported to Passenger Transport for BANES that the child was visibly scared to get into the taxi as the Licensee was shouting out of his car window at her which had caused the child to run uncontrollably across the school site. The SENCO also recorded that the child had commented several times at home and school that she feels the taxi driver is not kind to her. The SENCO went on to express the view that that afternoon the licensee had talked to the child in a very aggressive tone which was extremely unhelpful in encouraging the child into the taxi given her significant attachment and trauma difficulties.

The Co-Head of the school indicated in correspondence at Annex E of the report pack that the child has special education needs and an Education Health and Care Plan. She has complex emotional needs that lead to frequent, unpredictable and persistent challenging behaviours, often impulsive in nature and with no apparent triggers. She is unable to identify her emotions or regulate herself.

Members had regard to the fact that the licensee has had no complaints from members of the public in the seven years that he has been licensed. The licensee described his conduct as a mistake but said he is a good taxi driver.

Members bear in mind the fact that the licensee appeared before Committee on 10.03.22 when his licence was suspended for 3 months due to:

·  5 speeding convictions since the issue of the applicant’s first licence in 2016;

·  failure to follow the requirements of the licence to report motoring convictions despite the previous warning, and

·  the misinformation supplied by the licensee to a Civil Enforcement Officer.

·  The licensee was also warned by committee on that occasion that any further breach of licence conditions could have a different outcome.

Having regard to the licensee’s previous appearance before the Committee and resulting suspension as well as:

(1)  His behaviour during the incident on 05.07.23 which demonstrates he does not have the appropriate judgement of how to deal with children he is responsible for transporting,

(2)  the littering incident on 28.02.23

(3)   the incident on 15.07.23 where he failed to display his ID badge, and

(4)  The fact that he does not appear to have the insight into what conduct is required of him as a BANES licensed driver

Members are no longer satisfied that he is fit and proper to hold a combined hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence and consequently his licence is revoked.