Agenda item

The Director of Environment and Community Services submitted an exempt report in connection with an application for a Private Hire Vehicle Driver Licence, Ref: 22/24, where circumstances had arisen which required special consideration by the Committee.

 

The Chair introduced those present and outlined the procedure to be followed.  The applicant, who was in attendance at the meeting accompanied by his wife, verified his name and address and confirmed that he had received a copy of the report and understood its contents. 

 

The Principal Licensing Officer presented a summary of the report.  The applicant was previously licensed by Middlesbrough Council from 2016 until his licence was revoked in September 2019, due to the offence listed at 1) in the report.  It was noted that information prior to the applicant’s previous revocation could not be verified by the Licensing Department due to a data loss from electronic records.

 

It was highlighted that the circumstances surrounding the previous revocation of the applicant’s licence were that, in January 2019, a complaint was received by the Licensing department regarding his conduct towards a lone fifteen-year-old female he had transported in his Private Hire vehicle.  Due to the nature of the allegations made against the applicant, the female’s mother also reported the incident to Cleveland Police.

 

Confirmation was subsequently received from Cleveland Police that they had initiated legal proceedings against the driver.  Licensing Officers followed the usual procedure, at that time, and awaited the outcome of the Police investigation and any subsequent Court hearing prior to beginning a licensing investigation.  Members were made aware that the procedure had now changed and that Officers would revoke a licence with immediate effect until the Police investigation had concluded.

 

On 23 August 2019 the driver was found guilty of an offence of racially/religiously aggravated intentional harassment/alarm/distress – words/writing.  A copy of the driver’s revocation letter, dated 6 September 2019, was attached at Appendix 1.

 

The applicant made a fresh application on 9 September 2024 and, on 22 November 2024, supplied a DBS certificate which revealed the conviction recorded against him (as set out in the report).

 

A Licensing Enforcement Officer contacted the applicant by telephone on 27 November 2024 and asked him to confirm the content of the revocation letter in respect of his previous licence.  He confirmed the content but disputed the allegations made against him.  The applicant was also asked if he had declared any convictions/cautions or reprimands on his application form.  He was unsure but stated he had found the form confusing and due to his understanding of English had sought assistance from his wife.  A subsequent check of the application form by a Licensing Officer revealed that he had declared he had no convictions/cautions or reprimands.

 

The applicant confirmed that the report was an accurate representation of the facts and was invited to address the Committee. 

 

The applicant and his wife spoke in support of the application and responded to questions from Members of the Committee, the Council’s legal representative and the Principal Licensing Officer.

 

It was confirmed that there were no further questions and the applicant, his wife, and Officers of the Council, other than representatives of the Council’s Legal and Democratic Services teams, withdrew from the meeting whilst the Committee determined the application. 

 

Subsequently, all parties returned and the Chair announced a summary of the Committee’s decision and highlighted that the applicant would receive the full decision and reasons within five working days.

 

ORDERED that the application for a Private Hire Vehicle Driver Licence, Ref No: 22/24, be refused, as follows:-

 

Authority to Act

 

1.    Under Section 51 of the Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1976 (“the Act”) the Committee may decide to grant a Private Hire Vehicle driver’s licence only if it was satisfied the driver was a fit and proper person to be granted such a licence.

2.    The Committee considered Section 51 of the Act, the Middlesbrough Council Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Policy 2022 (“the Policy”), the report and representations made by the applicant.

 

3.    The application was considered on its own particular facts and on its merits.

 

Decision

 

4.     After carefully considering all the information, the Licensing Committee decided to refuse to grant the application for a Private Hire Vehicle driver’s licence on the grounds that the Committee was not satisfied the applicant was a fit and proper person to be granted the licence.  The reasons for the decision were as follows:-

 

Reasons 

 

5.     The applicant was convicted, on 21 August 2019, of racially/religiously aggravated intentional harassment/alarm and distress-words/writing.  The applicant was fined £402, £100 costs, £50 compensation and £40 victim surcharge for the offence.  At the time of the offence, the applicant held a licence which was revoked with immediate effect as a result of the conviction.

 

6.     The Policy on Convictions was set out at Appendix G, Policy on the Relevance of Convictions, Cautions, Reprimands, Warnings, Complaints and Character.

7.     The Policy was clear and it stated that where an applicant had a conviction involving or connected with discrimination in any form, a licence would not be granted until a period of seven years free from conviction had elapsed since the completion of any sentence imposed.

 

8.    The Policy was also clear in that it stated a driver should be a fit and proper person, not abuse or assault passengers, be courteous, avoid confrontation, not exhibit prejudice, not take the law into their own hands and demonstrate conduct befitting to the trust that was  placed in them.

 

9.     The Committee considered that the offence for which the applicant was convicted was one of discrimination.

 

10.  The circumstances surrounding the immediate revocation and conviction in 2019, was that a complaint was made that during a journey in the applicant’s Private Hire Vehicle, where he was carrying a lone 15-year-old female passenger, the applicant referred to the passenger as a ‘lazy pig’, a ‘fat pig’ and a ‘white slag’.

 

11.  The applicant pleaded not guilty to the offence, but the Court had tested the evidence and found the applicant guilty to the criminal standard after a trial.  The Court found that the applicant did use the words that were alleged, towards the passenger.

 

12.  On the immediate application the applicant had stated on the application form that he did not have any convictions, however, he did supply a copy of his DBS certificate, which revealed the conviction against him.  He stated that the application form was confusing and this was an oversight when questioned by Licensing Officers, and repeated this to the Committee Members.

 

13. The applicant told the Committee he had no way of proving his innocence, but stated he did not say the things he was convicted of.  He stated that he was a hard-working man and did not use foul language.  He stated that he believed the passenger had made the accusations because he had made comments about her being constantly late and informed her he would not pick her up in the future.

 

14.  The Policy was clear in that, for a discrimination offence, a licence would not be granted until seven years free from conviction has elapsed.  In the immediate application, it had only been five years.  Notwithstanding this, the Committee, based on the evidence they were presented with, decided that the applicant was not a fit and proper person.  The applicant was convicted by the Court of an offence against a lone 15-year-old female passenger, whereby he referred to her in derogatory and discriminatory terms and this was not behaviour befitting of a driver.

 

15.  The decision to refuse to grant the licence was in accordance with the Policy and the Committee considered there were no good or exceptional reasons to depart from it.  The Committee, for the reasons given above, could not be satisfied the applicant was a fit and proper person or safe and suitable to be licensed as a private hire vehicle driver in Middlesbrough.

 

16.  If the applicant was aggrieved by the decision he may appeal to a Magistrates Court within 21 days from the date of the notice of the decision.  The local magistrates for the area was the Teesside Justice Centre, Teesside Magistrates, Victoria Square, Middlesbrough.

 

17.  If the applicant did appeal the decision and the appeal was dismissed by the Magistrates Court, the Council would claim its costs in defending its decision from the applicant which could be in the region of £1,000.