Agenda item

Checks were made to locate the licensee, but he was not in attendance when the hearing commenced at 10am.

Members decided to proceed with the other substantive item on the agenda first and see if the licensee was in attendance once that matter had concluded. Members asked the Senior Public Protection Officer to attempt to contact the licensee in the meantime.

Having concluded consideration of the other matter Members returned to this item. At 11.30am the licensee was not in attendance at the hearing. The Senior Public Protection Officer informed members of the contact made with the licensee in relation to his attendance at the hearing. Having considered all relevant information regarding whether to defer or proceed in the licensee’s absence, members resolved to proceed in the licensee’s absence.

The report and appendices related to this item on the agenda were read by members.

Decision & Reasons

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

This matter was due to be heard by the Licensing Sub Committee on 12^th December 2024; however, it was deferred in advance of that hearing due to a lack of committee time. The Licensee had been notified of the deferral.

On 12^th December 2024, the Licensee had been sent an email, and letter attachment, to the email address held for him on file. Within that correspondence, it was indicated that he was required to attend the Licensing Sub-Committee hearing at 10am on 2^nd January 2025 at the Guildhall in Bath; full address details were provided. He was asked to confirm his attendance, which he had not done, and he was warned that if he failed to attend the hearing, the matter might proceed in his absence. The Licensee was not in attendance at the hearing today. At the request of Members, the Senior Public Protection Officer – Licensing, attempted to contact the Licensee by telephone, on the mobile telephone number held for him on file. Two attempts to call were made which resulted in a ring tone initially followed by a busy tone. At 10.06 am the Senior Public Protection Officer received a text message from the Licensee indicating that he could not talk as he was driving. Two minutes later, the Senior Public Protection Officer sent a text message response asking if the Licensee would be attending the Licensing Sub-Committee meeting. By 11.30am a response had not been received, and the Licensee was not in attendance.

Members had to determine whether the matter should proceed in the Licensee’s absence today. In doing so, they had regard to the licensing procedure within the agenda report pack which says as follows: “In circumstances where a party fails to attend the Committee will consider whether to proceed in absence or defer to the next meeting. Should a matter be deferred the deferral notice will state that the matter may proceed in a party’s absence on the next occasion. In deciding whether to proceed all notices, communications and representations will be considered.” Members had regard to the correspondence with the Licensee in relation to his attendance at the Committee and, given the warnings he had had in relation to his non-attendance, determined that it was in the public interest to proceed in his absence.

Members had regard to the agenda report pack and all annexes to that report which included the minutes, reasons and decision for the Licensing Sub Committee hearing on 22^nd August 2024. Within that documentation, they had a note of the Licensee’s explanation to Members at that hearing.

Members noted that under section 55 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Licensee has to be fit and proper to hold an Operator’s licence. On the evidence before them, and for the reasons given by Members at the hearing of 22^nd August, they were no longer satisfied that he was fit and proper to hold his Operator’s licence. Those reasons are as follows:

1. Failed to familiarise himself with the conditions of his licence.

2. Failed to comply with his licence conditions at all times.

3. Failed to fully cooperate and answer promptly all questions raised by the licensing officers.

4. He has a history of speeding offences.

5. At times he has failed to declare to licensing officers his motoring convictions.

6. He has accumulated four speeding offences in less than four years contrary to the Council’s policy which is in place for the safety of the public

7. In 2022 the Licensing Sub Committee suspended his Driver’s Licence for a period of approximately two months.

8. He failed to comply with the conditions of his licence for the display of roof signs, personal identity badge and vehicle interior badge.

9. He drove a vehicle with a tyre that had failed an MOT.

10. He did not respond to a vehicle recall.

11. Members consider that he does not take seriously the requirement to comply with the licence conditions.

12. Members consider that he had not learnt his lesson from previous warnings, penalty points and suspension.

In relation to §4 Members attached relatively less weight to the Licensee’s speeding convictions per se; but his failure to declare relevant speeding convictions to the Licensing Section carried greater weight when considering whether he is fit and proper to hold an Operator Licence.

Members noted that as an Operator the Licensee would be one step removed from passengers; but his role would be to ensure the safety of the travelling public through the drivers that he manages. Furthermore, Operators should be well versed in the conditions of their licences and take the utmost care to ensure compliance with them. They should also be wholly cooperative with the Licensing Section in order to ensure compliance with the requirements imposed upon them and to ensure the safety of the travelling public. The Licensee has a record of non-compliance with numerous aspects of the licensing regime as noted above.

For these reasons Members consider on balance that the Licensee is not a fit and proper person to continue to hold a licence and revoke his Private Hire Operator’s licence.