Agenda and draft minutes

14 There were no apologies.

The Chair invited those who wished to do so to declare interests in respect of items on the agenda.

There were no declarations made.

There were no notifications received.

The public are likely to be excluded during the following item/s of business in accordance with Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972:-

INSERT AGENDA ITEMS HERE

RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the following items.

The circulated report of the Assistant Director of Regulatory Services was received in relation to the receipt of an application for a new private hire driver’s licence.

The Chair asked all present to introduce themselves to the applicant.

Appended to the report was a copy of the Disclosure and Barring Service Certificate (DBS) along with the completed application form.

The Interim Environmental Health Lead presented her report to the Licensing Panel and explained that the DBS had revealed two relevant convictions from  May 2008 and October 2012, both had been of a violent nature.

The council’s policy stipulates that ‘a licence will not be granted if an applicant has more than one conviction for an offence of a violent nature’. The panel therefore needed to consider whether they believed there were sufficient grounds to depart from policy and grant a licence, with or without additional conditions, or whether the application should be refused.

The applicant was asked by the Chair to explain what had happened in 2008 and 2012 and what action he had subsequently taken to evidence that he was a fit and proper person to consider for a licence.

The applicant clarified that he had been very young and easily influenced when the incidents took place and had been mixing with the ‘wrong crowd’ and had behaved in a bad way. Since the convictions he had turned his life around and matured, he had a young family that he wished to provide for and had consistently been employed in various roles including working on building sites and for two taxi companies. 

Councillors asked why he had only held a driving licence for two years?

The applicant clarified that he had lived and worked in the same vicinity and had not needed to drive until he moved to Wellingborough for work, he had, however, held a motorbike licence for some years.

The Chair asked the panel members if they had any further questions, there were none and he adjourned the meeting at 10.20am.

The meeting reconvened at 10.35am.

Decision:

Resolved that the granting of a licence to the applicant be approved, the panel having unanimously considered that the applicant, on the balance of probability, is a fit and proper person to be licenced to drive a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire vehicle.  

Reasons for Decision:

The panel took into consideration:

·         Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

·         The Council’s Taxi and Private Hire Conditions of Licensing (Wellingborough Area)

·         The Council’s Criminal Records Policy

·         The report from Amanda Wilcox on behalf of the Council

·         The application form for Private Hire Driver’s Licence

·         Verbal evidence from the applicant

The duty of the panel was to determine the application on the balance of probabilities. The panel noted that the applicant was 17 at the time of the conviction and that he had been free of any further convictions or cautions since 2012. The panel requested further information regarding how long the applicant has held a driver’s licence. The applicant explained that he had held  ...  view the full minutes text for item Lic/18

The circulated report of the Assistant Director of Regulatory Services was received in relation to an application for a new private hire driver’s licence.

The Chair welcomed the applicant and all present introduced themselves.

The Interim Environmental Health Lead presented her report.  Appended to the report was a copy of the Disclosure and Barring Service Certificate (DBS) and the completed application form.

The DBS revealed six convictions, with a total of eight offences, over a period from November 2001 to June 2012, which included offences such as Affray, Attempted robbery, two further offences of robbery, possession of crack cocaine with the intention to supply, the permitted use of premises for smoking cannabis and the commission of a further offence during the operational period of suspended sentence order and possession of cannabis.

The report detailed the council’s policy, with a serious view being taken of any drug related offences. The applicant’s integrity during the application process would also be taken into account. The applicant had failed to complete the application form correctly and had not detailed the convictions highlighted in the DBS.

The Chair asked the applicant why he had failed to complete the application form correctly.

The applicant explained that he thought the convictions were ‘spent’ and that he did not need to add them to the application form. He had been looking after his children when he completed the form and he felt that he had not been concentrating enough.

He considered that he was now a fit and proper person to hold a licence and the Chair asked him to explain why he felt that was the case.

He said he had not had any convictions for a number of years and was now a family man with four young children who he wished to provide for.  He was married and wished to be a good role model for his children. He was young and under the influence of his peers when the convictions took place.  He had moved away from the bad influences and now had a SIA Card which enabled him to work at venues and local pubs to ensure security and safety of the public. He considered he was a fit and proper person and wished to do a good job at all times. 

The panel continued to ask further questions around:

·         Why he had failed to complete the application form correctly.

·         Why he failed to declare the convictions listed on the DBS.

·         Why he considered that his convictions were not relevant enough to declare.

In response the applicant responded by saying his omission had been a genuine error as he thought he did not have to declare convictions from many years ago.  He was distracted during the completion of the form by his young child. He also stated that the events had taken place when he was young and he had received no parental guidance growing up and had been involved with the wrong sort of people who had been a bad influence.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item Lic/19

The Chair closed the meeting at 11.45am.