Agenda item

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.

He added that within the past week the Licensing department had received some additional information from the Police relating to an alleged offence that had been committed by the licensee on 24th September 2025. The alleged offence was the failure to comply with a red traffic light.

He explained that this resulted in a warning letter being sent to the keeper of the vehicle as the statutory time limits had expired.

The licensee addressed the Sub-Committee and said that they had been a taxi driver for 15 years, has a good record overall and many returning customers. They added that they had received a lot of five-star reviews on Uber and that as part of their role they take a child with SEND to and from school every day and has done this for the past three years.

They stated that their training and safeguarding records were all up to date.

They said that they were sorry for not issuing their insurance details in time and said that on this occasion it had been due to moving house.

They explained that English was not their first language and required help on occasion to understand information. They stated that they would ensure that this does not happen again.

The Chair asked the licensee if they would like to comment further on the incidents that had occurred with some customers / members of the public.

The licensee said that they believed that the two complaints made against them were racially motivated and said that from where they were at the time of one of the alleged incidents it would have been impossible to spit into the other vehicle.

They added that the incident in Combe Down was due to a lack of communication and that they were trying to be polite and helpful.

They stated that they had also not driven away whilst a customer was leaving their vehicle.

They informed the Sub-Committee that they have over 3,000 five-star ratings with Uber.

Councillor Toby Simon asked the licensee what their overall Uber rating was.

The licensee replied that it was 4.97.

Councillor Simon asked if the licensee had any other previous speeding offences prior to the offences that occurred in 2024.

The licensee replied that they had not any prior to 2024.

The Chair stated that a delay of 130 days to submit new insurance details was quite a gap and asked the licensee if they would like to make any further comment on this issue.

The licensee replied that there had been a lot of admin to do as part of the move and that when they had renewed their insurance, they had simply forgotten to send it into the Licensing department.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) reminded the licensee that it was a condition of their licence to submit new MOT and insurance details within the relevant timescales. He added that from the dashcam photos that have been received from the Police it showed that their vehicle was quite a distance away from the red light before proceeding to drive past it.

The licensee replied that there had been a high volume of traffic at the time and that it had been hard to observe the lights as other vehicles began to proceed across the roundabout.

The Chair asked the licensee if they wished to make a summing up statement.

The licensee stated that they had been a taxi driver for many years and were honest, helpful and polite in this role and never rude to members of the public. They said that they were sorry for their mistakes and would welcome being given another chance to continue with their job.

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 light of breaching conditions in their licence.

In doing so Members took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council’s Policy.

It is a legal requirement that drivers and operators must be ‘fit and proper’ for a licence to be granted under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. The Fit and Proper Person test is a statutory test, but there is no statutory definition. However, the Panel needs to be mindful of the Council’s Policy and the Statutory taxi and private hire vehicle standards which provides the Fit and Proper person test as: “Licensing authorities have a duty to ensure that any person to whom they grant a taxi or private hire vehicle driver’s licence is a fit and proper person to be a licensee. It may be helpful when considering whether an applicant or licensee is fit and proper to pose oneself the following question: Without prejudice, and based on the information before you, would you allow a person for whom you care, regardless of their condition, to travel alone in a vehicle driven by this person at any time of day or night?”

Members have asked themselves if they would allow their friends, loved ones and indeed all members of the community to travel alone in a vehicle driven by this person, which is considered to be substantively the same as the suggestion in the Standards Guidance. Members of the Licensing Sub-Committee are aware that decisions on the suitability of an applicant or licensee are made on the balance of probabilities.

Members received additional information from the police as part of an Information Sharing Agreement, comprising 5 pages. This included notification that the licensee committed two speeding offences in 2024 and failed to comply with a red light in September 2025. The Licensing Team contacted the licensee regarding the red light offence and the subsequent warning letter they had received from the police. The licensee responded to confirm they were not aware that an advisory letter equated to a caution. The licensee had been provided with a copy of this additional information, in advance of the hearing. 

Members heard from the licensee in oral representations and they had read the written explanations given by them in the agenda report pack.

The licensee did not provide the Licensing Team with updated valid insurance certificates or cover notes within seven working days of their expiry. This is one of the conditions of their Private Hire Vehicle licence. The late provision of their insurance certificate occurred on three occasions.

Compliance with these conditions 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.

The licensee said they had a good record, regular customers, were honest, reliable and polite. They frequently complete home to school trips and they update their training and safeguarding. They were apologetic for submitting their insurance certificates late to the Licensing Team. 

The licensee had received two complaints from members of the public whilst being licensed by BANES. In relation to this, the licensee considered that the complaints were racially motivated and they had not been proven. The customer had not responded to Uber’s request for further information.

In summing up, the licensee confirmed they had been a taxi driver for many years, they had not been rude to the public and apologised for any mistakes made.

Members gave weight to the licensee’s high Uber rating and that they had made an honest mistake with the late submission of the insurance certificates. 

Therefore, on balance, Members find that the Licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold the combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence. However, they issue a warning to them that:

(i)  They must ensure that they comply with all requirements, conditions and legal obligations upon them as a BANES licensed driver;

(ii)  They must put in place a reminder system when insurance is to be renewed and to supply new insurance certificates to the Licensing Team within the timescales required, this could include using the Cozi app.

If there are any further issues against this background, they will be referred back to the Licensing Sub-Committee and they are at risk of losing their licence by having it revoked.