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: 16/25, 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, verified his name and address and confirmed he had received a copy of the report and understood its contents. 

 

The Licensing Manager presented a summary of the report, outlining that the applicant appeared before Members in relation to the convictions detailed at 1) to 3) in the submitted report.  As part of his application, the applicant had stated ‘See DBS’ in response to the question regarding previous convictions and he subsequently provided a DBS disclosure certificate which revealed the convictions at 1) to 3) in the report.

 

The applicant was interviewed by a Licensing Officer on 14 April 2025 and confirmed that there were no outstanding matters of which the Council was unaware.  The applicant stated that he was previously licensed with Middlesbrough Council more than 10 years ago but was unable to recall when.  The applicant provided explanations in relation to the offences at 1) to 3) although he was unable to recall anything in relation to the offence at 2).

 

Licensing Officers made further checks in relation to the applicant’s disclosure that he was previously a licenced driver with Middlesbrough Council, however, no record was found due to the Council’s retention policy and the fact that he had been licenced more than 10 years ago. 

 

The applicant confirmed the content of the report as being an accurate representation of the facts and was invited to address the Committee in support of his application.

 

The applicant was invited to address the Committee in support of his application and responded to questions from Members of the Committee and the Council’s Legal Representative.

 

It was confirmed that there were no further questions and the applicant, 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’s Licence, Ref No: 16/25, be granted with a warning regarding the applicant’s future conduct, 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 grant the application for a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence on the grounds that it was satisfied the applicant was a fit and proper person to be granted such a licence.  The Licensing Committee decided to grant the licence with a warning.

 

Reasons

 

5.     The applicant was convicted of three offences as follows:

 

a.     Handling Stolen Goods (undertaking to assisting in retention, removal, disposal or realisation) on Theft Act 1968 S22(1) - 03 February 1997 – 6 months imprisonment.

 

b.     Destroy or damage property (value of damage £5000 of less) – offence against Criminal Damage Act 1971 s1(1) – 07 August 2013 – Supervision requirement community order, £150.00 costs, compensation of £15.00, unpaid work requirement and £60.00 victim surcharge.

 

c.      Failure to comply with requirements of a community order on Criminal Justice Act 2003 – 01 December 2014 - £10.00 fine.

 

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

 

7.     A person with a conviction, caution, reprimand or final warning issued by the Police, may not be permanently barred from obtaining a licence but should be expected to remain free from conviction or incident for an appropriate period, as set out in the Policy.

 

8.     For a new application, an applicant must produce adequate information that he was a fit and proper person to hold a licence.  Simply remaining conviction free may not generally be regarded as adequate evidence that an applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a licence.

 

9.     If offences had been committed, the Council would consider the nature of the offence, the age of the conviction, the age of the applicant when convicted, the sentence imposed and any other relevant factors.

 

10.  A licence would normally be refused if an applicant had been convicted of a serious offence involving dishonesty or had more than one conviction for a dishonesty offence, showing they were likely to be continually dishonest, regardless of the time elapsed since the conviction or completion of the sentence imposed.

 

11.  However, the Committee decided to depart from its Policy on this particular occasion as it considered there were good reasons to do so, as set out below.

 

12.  The application was made for the grant of a Private Hire Vehicle Driver Licence on 16 December 2024.

 

13.  The applicant provided a DBS Disclosure Certificate which revealed the convictions as set out above, recorded against him.

 

14.  On 14 April 2025, the applicant attended an interview with a Licensing Enforcement Officer to enable him to explain the circumstances regarding the convictions.

 

15.  The applicant advised that he had previously been a licensed driver with Middlesbrough Council over 10 years ago.  The applicant also explained that following an altercation, for which he was found not guilty, he had his licence revoked.

 

16.  Following subsequent checks of the archived records, Officers could find no record of the applicant having a licence with the Council or that it had been revoked.  Although a Licensing Officer did recall the applicant being previously licensed.

 

17.  The Committee heard that in respect of offence one, the applicant was eighteen at the time of the offence and that a friend had left a pair of speakers in his flat, which unbeknown to him, were stolen goods.  The applicant recalled being arrested and, after advice from his solicitor at the time, he was advised to plead guilty to handling stolen goods or face being charged with burglary.

 

18.  In respect of offence two, the applicant stated he had no recollection about the offence and what was damaged.  The applicant maintained this position when asked about the offence at the Committee hearing.

 

19.  In respect of offence three, the applicant stated that this was due to a mix up with his probation community service and that he had told them he was unable to work mornings due to his new job.

 

20.  During the Committee the applicant stated that he had since changed his life and has stayed out of trouble since his last conviction.

 

21.  The Committee found that the convictions against the applicant were serious and that one of those offences involved dishonesty.

 

22.  In line with the Policy, a licence would normally be refused if an applicant had been convicted of a serious offence involving dishonesty, in this instance, the handling stolen goods offence.

 

23.  However, the Committee determined that this offence was extremely dated, and over 28 years ago.  Furthermore, the Committee found that the applicant was only 18 at the time of the offence.

 

24.  As for the second and third offences, again the Committee determined that they were dated and did not wish to continue to punish the applicant.  The Committee found that the applicant had subsequently changed his ways after these offences.

 

25.  The Committee considered the applicant a fit and proper person to hold a licence.

 

26.  Therefore, the Committee decided to grant the licence but issue an official warning with the granting of the same.  The warning aimed to emphasise to the applicant that any further incident may risk his licence being revoked and could be a factor in any future licensing decision, should the applicant find himself before the Committee again.

 

27.  This decision was final and there was no internal or statutory route of appeal, however, the licensee had the option of judicially reviewing the lawfulness of the decision to the high court if grounds had been made out.  If the Licensee decided to challenge the decision by way of judicial review he may wish to seek independent legal advice as to the grounds and time limits that may apply.   If the Licensee decided to take this course of action, the Council would apply for any costs it incurred in defending its decision.