Modern.gov Breadcrumb
- Agenda item
Modern.gov Content
Agenda item
SA - APPLICATION FOR THE RENEWAL OF A HACKNEY CARRIAGE DRIVER LICENCE
Minutes:
The applicant was present with a friend.
The Licensing Officer introduced the report and drew attention to the following:
· SA applied for renewal in September 2021. The DBS check revealed a conviction for ABH in 2012. PSP sub-committee suspended his licence for a month in July 2012.
· Under the Council’s latest Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Licensing Policy which came into force in July 2020 and incorporates national standards, a conviction for an offence involving violence means that a licence will not be granted in general, until at least 10 years have elapsed since the completion of any sentence imposed.
· The sub-committee will have to reconsider whether SA is fit and proper to hold a licence under this new policy.
The appellant gave the following evidence:
· SA has not been involved in any other offences since the case in 2010/12. He now has a family with three children and views himself as a good role model. He is active in the community, including working as a football coach. This was an isolated incident from a long time ago. He was provoked in that incident but reacted very badly.
· SA was surprised by the referral to sub-committee and believed that it was regarding an error on the application form rather than the previous conviction.
After questioning from the sub-committee, the following information was confirmed
· SA started driving from June 2004 according to electronic records. There are no other offences or complaints registered against him.
· The new national standards and the Council’s latest policy states not to license individuals with a conviction for a violent offence until 10 years has elapsed. Therefore, the matter has been brought before the sub-committee to consider.
· The sub-committee said that it would be interested in how SA’s character had changed since the offence. SA said that should he find himself in an altercation he would do everything he could to escape as he does not want to be in a violent situation again and has too much to lose.
· The large time difference between arrest and conviction was attributed to a backlog in the court system as the case was heard in Crown Court.
The applicant was given the opportunity to sum up, then parties left the room while the sub-committee deliberated.
DECISION
The sub-committee is convinced that this was an isolated incident in 2010. It is aware that it cannot go behind a conviction and the latest policy states at least 10 years to elapse following the completion of any sentence. The sub-committee considers the sentence imposed in the Crown Court to be at the lower end of the sentencing options available which reflects his previous good character and mitigating circumstances. The offence was over 10 years ago and there has been no further offending behaviour since, and the sub-committee does not consider SA to present as a risk to public safety and protection. It is satisfied that he is remorseful and has since reflected on his actions, and that he is a fit and proper person to hold a licence.
Supporting documents:
- Restricted enclosure View the reasons why document 11./1 is restricted