Agenda item

The Director of Adult Social Care and Health Integration submitted an exempt report in connection with an application for a Private Hire Vehicle Driver Licence Ref: 09/ 23.

 

The Chair introduced those present and outlined the procedure to be followed. The Applicant, who was accompanied by a relative, verified his name and address. A copy of the report was provided to the Applicant who confirmed he understood its contents.

 

The Licensing Manager presented a summary of the report, outlining the Applicant appeared before Members in relation to offences 1 and 2 in the report. Members were advised the Applicant already held a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence with Wolverhampton Council which was due to expire in 2024.

 

Members were advised, that in relation to offence 1, the Applicant had undertaken and completed the necessary actions required for the offence. Members were also advised, that in relation to offence 2 in the report, the Applicant was not in the country at the time of being notified of the offence.

 

The Applicant was invited to make his case to the Committee. The Applicant informed Members that, despite being licenced with Wolverhampton Council, it would be advantageous to be licenced in Middlesbrough as this would be closer to home. The Applicant’s relative advised Members that while the offences cited in the report were regrettable, they had happened, nonetheless.

 

When asked, the Applicant informed Members he did not disclose on his application form the offence at 2 in the report as he thought that conviction was spent. 

 

The Applicant continued to present the case in support of his application and responded to questions from Members 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 Legal and Democratic Services, 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 Private Hire Vehicle Driver Licence, Ref No: 09/23, be refused.

 

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 is satisfied the driver is 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 and his representative.

 

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 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 a licence by Middlesbrough Council.  The reasons for the decision are as follows:

 

Reasons

 

5.    The Applicant had been convicted of Battery on the 13 August 2020.  He received a Community Order with a rehabilitation activity requirement.  This Order expired on the 1 September 2022.

 

6.    The Applicant was convicted of Battery of his wife and had hit her three times in her face.  The Applicant had said this was because as he took his son from his wife to feed him, she had pushed him, and he had reacted by hitting her.  The child was under a child protection plan until this was removed in 2022. The Applicant said that he was sorry for the offence, that he is still with his wife, and they have a second child.

 

7.    The Applicant had confirmed that despite this offence, he had been granted a licence to drive private hire vehicles by Wolverhampton Council and was employed in the area.

 

8.    Middlesbrough Council’s Policy on violence was very clear.  Licensed drivers were in an extreme position of trust and operated in a high-risk environment. A person who responded with violence when provoked is not suitable to be licensed.  The Policy made it clear that Middlesbrough Council considered incidents of domestic violence to be extremely serious. It also considered if an individual was prepared to assault a person in a domestic or home environment then there were concerns over the person’s ability to maintain their temper when working in an environment dealing with volatile members of the public. 

 

9.    The Policy sent out a clear message that an Applicant with a conviction involving violence against a person or connected with any offence of violence against a person would not be licensed unless they could show a period of at least ten years free of any such violent incident since the completion of any sentence imposed.  This clearly reflected the Council’s position that the travelling public should be safe and feel safe when being driven by Middlesbrough Council licensed drivers.  Applicants who had previously committed violence needed to show a ten-year free period to reflect they had been successfully rehabilitated and were no longer likely to be a risk or a threat.

 

10.  The Policy reflected and incorporated the Statutory National Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Standards.  This was brought in to tackle failing standards in the private hire and hackney carriage trade where children and vulnerable passengers had been put at risk and / or harmed.  This says for violent offences against the person the starting point was ten years free from completion of the sentence and a cautious view should be taken of offences involving violence against vulnerable groups.

 

11.  The Policy was widely consulted upon and set the clear standards required of Licensed drivers in Middlesbrough.  The Committee did have the power to depart from the Policy in exceptional circumstances or where there are very good reasons to do so.  The Committee did not accept there were such exceptional, clear or compelling circumstances in this case to depart from the Policy because a Licence was granted by a different Council hundreds of miles away from Middlesbrough and Wolverhampton may not (up to now) have received complaints.

 

12.  Although the Applicant had a licence from Wolverhampton and could carry out private hire under that Licence in Middlesbrough, the Committee considered it could not in all consciousness grant a licence to a person who committed battery on his wife with the sentence expiring only 1 year ago, which involved a child and where child protection services had to become involved.  The Members of the Committee had duty to, and are accountable to, the public of Middlesbrough (unlike Members of Wolverhampton Council who were accountable to the constituents of Wolverhampton), to ensure so far as possible its travelling public were safe when being driven by Middlesbrough Licensed Drivers and that Middlesbrough Council standards are upheld.

 

13.  In addition, the Applicant failed to declare his conviction for battery and a conviction for speeding on his application form.  The Applicant claimed he had not read the form properly and thought his conviction was spent.  The Committee would not accept this excuse.  The Application Form was very clear and asked for any criminal cautions, convictions, motoring offences or any summons served or enquiries or investigations of any kind.  The Policy was clear on this point.  It was an offence to knowingly or recklessly make a false declaration or omit material and where an Applicant had made a false declaration the Policy said a licence should be refused.  It also said a licence should be refused if an Applicant misled the Council or lied as part of the Application process.  It was also essential in the interests of public protection that licensees could be relied upon to self-report and the Applicant had failed to do this in his application form. The Policy again reflected the Statutory Standards which questioned the honesty and suitability of an Applicant who did not disclose relevant information.

 

14.  Therefore, the Committee decided that it could not be satisfied the Applicant was fit and proper in accordance with its Policy and the Statutory Standards to be granted a Licence by Middlesbrough Council.

 

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

 

16.  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 £1000 or more.