Modern.gov Breadcrumb

Modern.gov Content

Agenda item

SA - an application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage Driver (HCD) seeking departure from Council policy

Minutes:

The driver (SA) was in attendance. PC Quinton from Avon and Somerset Constabulary was in attendance.

 

The Senior Licencing Officer introduced the report and drew attention to the following:

·       The application is for both a Hackney Carriage Driver (HCD) licence and Hackney Carriage Vehicle (HCV) licence.

·       SA has held an HCD and HCV previously, but they were refused and revoked respectively by this committee on 26 May 2020.

·       SA appealed the PSP decision at Magistrates’ Court, but his appeal was dismissed. The Magistrates’ indicated he may want to apply for a licence after a 6 month period, but this would be at the discretion of the licensing authority who were not bound by this decision as any application would be subject to tests and checks.

·       SA’s vehicle does not meet current emissions policy, the previous vehicle licence was granted under  “grandfather rights” which are no longer in force now that the vehicle has been unlicensed for a period of time due to the HCV licence being revoked in May 2020. The Council’s policy on private hire vehicles states that a vehicle upon first application has to be an ultra-low emission vehicle with Co2 output below 75g per km. SA’s vehicle is 109g per km (first application includes where the licence has been revoked)

·       SA has previously held a HCD licence since BCC records began in 2003 until it was revoked by PSP in January 2012, due to SA plying for hire. SA was relicensed 2013 and held this until it expired in March 2020. The PSP Committee refused to grant a licence in May 2020 as they found he was not a fit and proper person to hold a licence.

·       SA has made a false declaration on his current application as he has previous convictions but did not declare them. The previous PSP Committee’s  decision to revoke his licence was due to offending behaviour and making a false declaration on a previous application. The previous PSP Committee’s decision emphasises that SA must not make false statements in future and he has also been reminded of this is in subsequent correspondence

·       Over the past 12 months SA has committed a number of offences. This includes: Driving without a HCD licence, making false statement on application, smoking in a HCV, failure to wear ID badge, failure to display ID plates and mechanical faults with the vehicle.  SA has not been licensed since the refusal in May 2020, so the offences actually took place over a much shorter period of time.

·       The officer believes this shows a pattern of offending behaviour and non-compliance with the relevant authorities.

 

The applicant gave the following evidence:

·       SA said that his vehicle was within emission standards as it had Co2 emissions of below 1g per km. It was confirmed during the hearing that the vehicle had a Co2 emission rate of 109g/km and the 0.267g/km figure referred to Co (Carbon Monoxide, rather than Carbon Dioxide).

·       SA said that the majority of the offences listed in the report were recorded when he was off-duty or not licenced. SA said that he removes IDs from the exterior of the vehicle to prevent them from being stolen when he is off-duty. The smoking offences were committed when SA was not working, as he used his licenced vehicle for personal use. Officers told SA that a licenced vehicle is subject to regulations for the duration of the licence period. SA said he now understood that it was an offence at any time and said that he intended to purchase another car for private use and keep the licenced vehicle purely for business.

·       SA said that he has not received a complaint from the public about his conduct throughout many years of  working as a taxi driver.

 

After questioning from the committee, the following information was confirmed:

·       SA said that not completing the previous conviction section of the application was a mistake and he was also not sure whether to complete a grant or renewal form.

·       SA appealed unsuccessfully against the revocation of his licence in 2012. He applied for a new HCD licence which was granted in 2013. The appeal process did not overturn the original plying for hire conviction in 2011, which should still be declared. SA admitted that he should have declared this conviction and apologised for the error.

·       There was another discussion about car emissions and it was confirmed that SA was talking about carbon monoxide, not carbon dioxide. While the car was previously permitted to be licensed due to “grandfather rights” these no longer applied and the vehicle does not meet the requirements of the policy.

·       It was clarified that the revocation of SA’s previous licence still stands as the Court dismissed his appeal. This is therefore a new application. SA said that he sought exemption from the gold standard and knowledge tests.  

 

The Committee withdrew to deliberate on their decision.

 

RESOLVED (unanimous decision) Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence (HCVL) application is refused. Hackney Carriage Driver Licence (HCDL) application is granted.

 

The vehicle subject to SA application has a C02 emission of 109 g/km and therefore does not meet the policy criteria and the Members were not satisfied that there was any justification for departing from the policy. SA stated that the CO2 emissions were 0.267 (g/km or g/kWh) however the registration certificate clearly shows that the figure 0.267 refers to C0 (carbon monoxide) emissions which is different from C02 (carbon dioxide) emissions.

 

In regards to the HCDL, this is granted subject to SA undertaking the steps set out in section 25 of the papers, that is:

a. Gold Standard training

b. Knowledge test

c. An enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service Check.

d. Medical examination report

e. Licence fee

 

The committee emphasised that the granting of the HCDL was lenient, and SA’s offences would normally result in an off the road period of two years rather than six months. Any future offences on SA’s part will result in a referral to this committee and SA must take care to read and abide by all the conditions set out in the licensing documentation.