Report from the Assistant Director (Localities) is attached
Minutes:
The Deputy Licensing Officer presented reports submitted by the Assistant Director (Localities) regarding applications for Public/Private Hire Vehicles Drivers’ Licences.
The applicants were invited to attend the meeting for separate hearings and the Chair outlined the procedure to be followed. The applicants and their representatives were invited to address the Panel separately on their applications and any matters referred to in the Officer’s report.
1. The applicant 02/2014, who was unrepresented, accepted the contents of the report and was invited to address the Panel. The applicant explained
the offence of driving without insurance had been a genuine mistake as he had believed his sisters vehicle, which he had driven, had been insured for
him to drive. It had always previously been insured for any driver and he assumed it still did. She was away at the time of the offence. Members of the Panel asked questions.
Delegated decision:
That after careful consideration of the representations submitted and taking into account the Council’s Convictions Policy and Guidelines, the application for a Private Hire Driver’s Licence be approved. Although the Panel acknowledged the seriousness of the offence of driving with no insurance, it was almost 3 years ago and the applicant showed remorse and the Panel therefore agreed unanimously that the applicant was a fit and proper person in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.
2. The applicant 01/2014, who was supported by his son, accepted the contents of the report and was invited to address the Panel. The applicant stated that he took full responsibility for his actions and the subsequent convictions and explained his account of the offences which lead to the convictions. The applicant stated that he had served time in Prison for the offences and consequently he had lost everything including his house and car and for a time, contact with his son.
The applicant explained that the conviction for blackmail related to threats made by 2 individuals against a man who owed him and his Father a large business debt. The applicant and his Father had a business together and this debt had resulted in the failure of the business that he and his Father had worked so hard for which in turn resulted in him getting into financial
difficulties. He stated that he told the two individuals about this and threats were then made resulting in his arrest. He had pleaded guilty to the offence and accepted he had made a mistake.
The applicant went on to explain that as a result of the business failing he began to work on markets and was offered counterfeit clothing to sell. He began to sell these over the internet and also asked others to sell them for him. This became very lucrative. He stated that he realised this too was a mistake and when arrested again pleaded guilty to the offences. He also accepted he was in breach of the suspended prison sentence he received for the earlier blackmail offence.
The applicant was released from prison almost 3 years ago.
The applicant informed the Panel that he was truly sorry for the past and that he wanted a ‘normal’ life now. He had a small flat but he needed the Private Hire Driver’s Licence in order to earn a living.
The applicant’s son also addressed the Panel and explained that his Father, whom he had been brought up by, had always worked hard with
his Grandfather and that he had always been a fruitful member of Society. His Father was now very eager to contribute to Society again and at the
age of 53 years, he needed this opportunity and he requested that the Panel grant a Provisional Licence.
Members of the Panel asked questions of the applicant during which he indicated that in relation to the offence of blackmail, the 2 individuals involved were known to him, but also knew the victim and that he was unaware of their actions. This was accepted by the court when he was sentenced, as was the fact that the victim owed him a large debt. He also stated that in relation to the offences relating to the counterfeit clothing, this related to clothing to the value of approximately £200,000. There had however been no Proceeds of Crime Application in relation to it.
Delegated decision:
The Panel carefully considered the written report and oral representations made by the applicant, and his son. The Panel also noted that the Council’s Convictions Policy and Guidelines do not specifically refer to these types of offences, but that they do deal with offences of dishonesty and deception. Taking these matters into account, the Panel found that;
· The offences for which the applicant had been convicted were of a very serious nature, namely blackmail; conspiring, concealing, disguising, converting, transferring or removing criminal property; conspiring or selling goods bearing false trade mark and failing to comply with Community requirements of a suspended sentence order,
· The most recent offences involved a large amount of money,
The offences had resulted in the subsequent sentencing to a total of 39 months imprisonment
· In view of these matters the applicant is not a fit and proper person in accordance with the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, to hold a Licence,
And therefore the Panel resolved that the application for a Private Hire Driver’s Licence be refused.
The applicant was advised of their right to appeal within 21 days of notification to the Magistrates’ Court.