Agenda item

Councillor T. Holt chaired the Licensing and Safety Panel for this agenda item only.

Licence Holder 26/2020

The Executive Director (Operations) submitted a report relating to Licence Holder 26/2020 who attended the virtual meeting via audio only.

The Chair made introductions of the panel and the Legal Officer present outlined the procedure to be followed and clarified that all those present had read the report. The report which was accepted by the Licence Holder set out the reasons for the Licence Holder being before the Panel.

This applicant was first granted a private hire driver’s licence on the 22nd September 2011 which was valid for 12 months. The applicant held a private hire driver’s licence from the 18th September 2015 until the 9th October 2017. The applicant was issued with a three-year private hire driver’s licence on the 3rd January 2018 which expired on the 2nd January 2021.

On the 21st January 2021, this applicant submitted an online application for a private hire driver’s licence. Within the application he declared a conviction for battery and criminal damage dating back to 18th October 2018. The licensing service does not have a record of this applicant having ever declared these convictions previously.

The applicant has subsequently provided a DBS certificate which indicated the following:

The service was not aware of these offences previously.

This applicant was before the committee for the following reasons: - A) Failing to declare the convictions during his previous licence period as required by condition 13 of a private hire driver’s licence. B) The offence falls within the Conviction Guidelines.

The applicant was subsequently interviewed by a licensing enforcement officer. He explained that the convictions occurred when a relationship came to an end. The applicant explained that he has never previously been in trouble with the Police and he believes this conviction resulted in a possible job with Greater Manchester Police failing to materialise. The applicant strongly regrets the incident citing stress and personal issues he was facing at that time. When asked why he had failed to notify the service, as per his licence conditions, the applicant explained that he was not aware of this requirement as taxi driving is not his main occupation but is merely something, he likes to keep valid as a means to fall back on to supplement his income.    The applicant was emailed a summary of what had been discussed over the telephone and asked whether he agreed with this or wanted to amend anything. He agreed with the summary which was attached to the restricted agenda pack as Appendix 1.

The Council’s convictions policy and guidelines state: Members of the Licensing & Safety Panel are required to have regard to Bury Council’s convictions policy and guidelines when considering an application for a private hire or a hackney carriage driver licence.  Members should adhere to the policy and guidelines unless there are exceptional circumstances for them to depart from them

Delegated decision:

The Panel heard from the licence holder who stated that this was a not intended to be his main employment, it was intended as a back-up position. He told the panel that he had not considered that the Licensing Panel would need to know about a civil matter and that is why he had not previously reported it. He told the Panel that he was embarrassed by the whole incident.

The Panel carefully considered the report, the additional documentation and oral representations by licence holder 26/2020 and taking into account the Council’s Conviction Policy and Guidelines and in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, resolved, on a majority basis, to refuse the Licence application. The panel agreed that the matter was not civil in nature but criminal, the offences being committed contrary to criminal statutes, this being supported by the fines and compensation information. The Panel determined that the convictions were less than 3 years old and they had heard nothing that would move them to detract from the licencing policy. Therefore, the panel unanimously agreed that the applicant was not a fit and proper person to be granted a taxi licence.