A report by the Assistant Director (Localities) is attached.
Minutes:
The Deputy Licensing Officer presented a report submitted by the Assistant Director (Localities) on the proposed suspensions of Private Hire Driver’s Licences.
1.Licence holder 22/2015 attended the meeting and was accompanied by a friend. The Chair outlined the procedure to be followed and the Deputy Licensing Officer read the report which explained that on 12 October 2015 the vehicle belonging to the Licence holder, which was a Toyota Avensis, underwent a routine 6 month interim inspection at Bradley Fold Test Centre and had failed the test with 18 faults. The report was accepted by the Licence holder and his friend.
The Licence holder was given the opportunity to address the Panel and explained that he had acquired this vehicle on 27 August 2015 and in relation to the poor maintenance and preparation of the vehicle for testing he had rarely driven it for private hire use as he had been off work caring for his wife who had been diagnosed with a brain tumour. The Licence holder presented a letter from the hospital confirming this information and a letter from his wife explaining the situation, both of
which were accepted by the Panel. The Licence holder also explained that he no longer has the Toyota as he has now got a new vehicle which is a ’56 plate and although it is an older vehicle also, it is in very good condition.
The Licence holder apologised but explained this had been a very difficult time for him and his wife but that her health was now improving and he now had a new vehicle and felt he was ‘back on track’.
Delegated decision:
After carefully considering the written report, oral statements from the Licence Holder and documentation provided by him, pursuant to the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Panel resolved, to admonish the licensee as to future conduct and to take no further action.
2. Licence holder 23/2015 attended the meeting and was accompanied by his brother and a character referee. The Licence Holder’s brother stated that he was a CWU Representative and was attending the meeting to represent his brother. Both Councillors Holt and Walker declared they were also members of CWU.
The Chair outlined the procedure to be followed and the Deputy Licensing Officer read out the report. The Licence Holder declared he was in fact 34 years old, not 35 as stated in the report.
The Licence Holder’s brother then addressed the Panel and stated that although there had been 4 separate allegations of inappropriate comments of a sexual nature to a lone female passenger made against the Licence holder by the complainant, the last of which had been on Wednesday 21 October 2015. He stated that no formal complaint had been made to the Licence Holder’s employer until 27 October 2015, 6 days after the last alleged incident.
It was explained to the Licensing and Safety Panel that the Licence Holder was of sound character and that following his granting of a Private Hire Driver’s Licence in June 2011, he had to take time off work as his wife was very sick with a brain tumour. He has since furthered his education taking level 1 & 2 courses in motor mechanics. The family are very religious and the Licence holder had visited Haj in Saudi Arabia on 3 separate occasions, including taking his vulnerable Mother. He was a caring family man and the allegations were a complete fabrication and were having a negative effect on his health.
The Licence Holder’s referee stated he has known the Licence Holder for 3 years as he had worked for the same private hire company, as a radio operator. He stated that the allegations were completely out of character and he believed that they were untrue.
The Licence Holder then addressed the Panel and explained that he believed that the complainant had taken offence when he had tried to advise her not to leave University as she had suggested she may do.
He explained that she had always sat in the front of his vehicle and if she had felt so uncomfortable in his company she could have sat in the back of the vehicle. He further stated that his employer frequents the pub that the complainant works in and she could have mentioned this to him. He went on to explain that he had previously worked as a doorman and had no criminal record.
Delegated decision:
After carefully considering the written report, which included the statement from the complainant and oral statements from the Licence holder, his brother and character referee and taking into consideration the relevant policy and the Council’s Conviction Guidelines and the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, the Panel resolved, unanimously, to suspend the Licence holder for 3 months.
The Panel found that;
· the complaints against the Licence Holder were of a serious nature
· there were 4 separate incidents
· the content of the complainants statement that inappropriate conversation had taken place was true
· there was no valid explanation from the Licence Holder to explain why the complainant would lie
· the Licence Holder accepted that conversations had taken place during which he had told the complainant he had been a doorman and commented upon her appearance
· the Licence Holder had been vague in his recollections regarding other parts of the alleged conversations
· the behaviour of the Licence Holder was not acceptable as a licensed driver within Bury.
The Licence holder was informed of their right of appeal to Bury Magistrates’ Court within 21 days.