A report from the Executive Director (Operations) is attached.
Minutes:
Licence Holder 36/2021
The Executive Director (Operations) submitted a report relating to Licence Holder 36/2021 who was in attendance at the meeting alongside his representative Mr Oakes.
The Chair made introductions and the Council Solicitor 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 and presented by the Deputy Licensing Officer, set out the reasons for the Licence Holder being before the Committee.
</AI9>
The report stated that the Licence Holder had held a private hire driver’s licence continually since the 19th May 2012. His most recent licence commenced on the 20th May 2021 and is due to expire on the 19th May 2022.
The report went on to state that the Licensing Service had received a complaint from a member of the public which included a video file taken from their dashcam. This footage had been circulated for Members of the Licensing Committee to view and the verbatim complaint from the road user was included in the agenda pack.
From the footage supplied by the complainant, showed a licensed vehicle mounting the pavement and undertaking at least 2 vehicles on a main road. The Licensing Service was able to identify the vehicle and subsequently the driver of that vehicle. It was confirmed by the Private Hire Operator, that this Licence Holder had been driving the vehicle in question at the time the footage was recorded. A still image of the video incident was included in Appendix 1 of the report.
This Licence Holder was subsequently interviewed by Enforcement Officers from the Licensing Service. He attended the interview with his representative and upon viewing the dashcam footage, accepted immediately that he had been the driver of the licensed vehicle in question. He explained that he had been desperate for the toilet which was brought on by his tablet-controlled diabetes. This Licence Holder subsequently supplied medical documents and the excerpts detailing diabetes were included in Appendix 2 of the agenda pack.
The Licence Holder through his representative explained that he was heading towards a car wash on Bolton Road where he intended to use the toilet. He was unable to explain why he had not used the facilities at two petrol stations which he would have driven past on his way from Summerseat. It was stated that he had not been carrying passengers at the time and has supplied documentation from his operator confirming he had been on a break prior to the incident (This was detailed in Appendix 3 of the agenda pack). It was pointed out to him that he would not have been able to see pedestrians on the pavement and would not have seen or have been seen by road users potentially travelling on the concealed exit of Woodhill Road on his left. The Licence Holder stated that he knew his actions were wrong and had been very apologetic whilst accepting that his actions could have potentially endangered the public. It was again reiterated that his actions were due to his need to go to the toilet.
The Licence Holder’s representative confirmed acceptance that the driving was not up to standard and had put people at risk, but that the Licence Holders medical condition was a factor for the incident. It was stated that the Licence Holder was lucky there was no one on the pavement and unlucky to have been caught on the dashcam. It was noted that there are no previous complaints reported against the Licence Holder and an apology was submitted and a request for a short suspension rather than revoke of the licence was mentioned.
Members queried why a number of venues with toilet facilities were not utilised which were closer to where the Licence Holder was heading. The Licence Holder thought he was not allowed to use the toilet at some of the locations mentioned by Members and that he usually works in a different area to the one where the incident occurred. He indicated that the need to go to the toilet happens often but that he usually near to a supermarket where he can use the facilities. Members also questioned the speed the Licence Holder was travelling at and he indicated around 20 miles per hour.
The Chair questioned the Licence Holder on the driving incident and the fact that he would not have been able to see pedestrians or vehicles exiting the side street adjacent to where the van was turning off the main road due to a blind spot and sightlines. This was noted by the Licence Holder and he apologised for his actions.
Delegated decision:
The Committee carefully considered the report, and oral representations by the Licence Holder and his representative.
Taking into account the Council’s Conviction Policy and Guidelines and in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Committee resolved to revoke the licence with immediate effect.
The reasons for the Committee’s decision were as follows:
· The actions of the Licence Holder were extremely serious and could have resulted in the death or personal injury to pedestrians and other road users
· Public safety is paramount for a driver of any vehicle and the actions of the Licence Holder showed a disregard for pedestrians and other road users
· The standard of driving was dangerous and reckless driving, and not that expected of a licensed driver in Bury Council
· The Licence Holder showed no real understanding or remorse for his actions and the danger he placed pedestrians and other road users in
· The medical reasons provided by the Licence Holder did not provide a sufficient explanation or justification for the dangerous actions of the Licence Holder
· The explanation for the non-use of other nearby restroom facilities was not accepted as a reasonable explanation based upon the danger and lack on concern for public safety demonstrated by the action of the non-use of other nearby restroom facilities
· As a professional driver, the Licence Holders medical condition should have been better and more appropriately managed by planning and the use of regular breaks, and in the interests of public safety
· There were no assurances given that this had not happened on previous occasions or that it would not happen again in the future, or any proposals as to how the Licence Holder would act differently so as to ensure public safety at all times.
Licence Holder 39/2021
The Executive Director (Operations) submitted a report relating to Licence Holder 39/2021 who was in attendance at the meeting. The Chair made introductions and the Council Solicitor 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 and presented by the Licensing Manager, set out the reasons for the Licence Holder being before the Committee.
</AI9>
The report stated that the Licence Holder had held a private hire driver’s licence continually since the 14th August 2013 until its expiry on the 20th March 2022. Upon submitting an application to renew a private hire drivers’ licence on the 1st March 2022, the Applicant selected no when asked “Do you have any convictions, fines or formal cautions?” and ‘no’ when asked “Have you been issued with any fixed Penalty notices.” A subsequent check of this Applicants DVLA driving licence indicated that they had been convicted on 15 September 2021 for exceeding the speed limit on a motorway, for which he was fined £100 and his licence endorsed with 3 penalty points.
The Licensing Service had no record of this offence and consequently, it was not declared within the correct time frame as stipulated in the private hire drivers licence conditions.
This Licence Holder was subsequently contacted by a Licensing Officer, and they explained the background to the offence which was detailed in appendix 1 of the report attached to the agenda pack.
The Licence Holder apologised to the Committee and explained that the type of work they undertake was more a chauffeur service than regular taxi. They had very high standards and undertake work for high profile VIP’s. On this occasion the journey was in relation to the transportation of Covid testing and there were time implications involved. The Licence Holder explained that due to having to complete the application form at home around a busy family life and having a disabled child, they forgot about the offence and ‘no’ was selected in relation any offences.
The Licence Holder admitted their error and that this was careless and it was a genuine mistake after 33 years of holding a clean driving licence. They stated they were extremely sorry.
The Committee reminded the Licence Holder of the email sent by the Licensing Department in relation to declaring conditions. The Licence Holder accepted they had probably received the email but had again forgotten about its contents.
Delegated decision:
The Committee carefully considered the report, and oral representations by the Licence Holder. The Committee noted the record of the Licence Holder and how long they had held a licence without having any complaints or convictions. However they noted that recent date of the offence should have acted as a reminder to disclose the conviction to the Licensing Service.
Taking into account the Council’s Conviction Policy and Guidelines and in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Committee resolved to admonish the licensee as to future conduct via a written letter.
Supporting documents: