Agenda item

The Committee considered a report to determine whether action should be taken against the holder of a hackney carriage driver licence and hackney carriage vehicle.

Wayne Jones (Neighbourhood Enforcement Team) and PC Qunition were in attendance, as well as AG and his representative.

Wayne Jones presented this report and made the following comments:

•            AG’s current licence was due to expire on 14th July 2022

•            Following an incident on 4th June 2021, PC Quinton had notified the Neighbourhood Enforcement Team on 27th August 2021 that AG had been observed using a hand held device while driving his vehicle. AG received a fine and 6 points on his licence. It was noted that this case would shortly be heard in court. AG had not notified licensing authorities of this incident as required

•            It was also noted that there were several other endorsements on his licence between 2017 and 2029 relating to exceeding the statutory speed limit including exceeding the speed limit on the motorway

•            In addition, between 2000 and 2020, AG had received a large number of other offences including a caution for failing to use a metre to record a journey and a failure to show a true fare on a taximeter, as well as allegations of using a mobile phone whilst driving, speeding, driving unprofessionally, overcharging and incorrectly displaying plates.

•            Officers believed that AG was not a fit and proper person to hold a licence and that therefore his licence should be revoked

PC Quinton advised the Sub-Committee that there were further allegations of AG driving whilst using a mobile phone. Whilst AG had stated that the reason for the call was  due to a phone call that he had received from the hospital, this had not been an emergency.

AG’s Representative stated that AG requested leniency from the Sub-Committee on the grounds that he needed to retain his job as a Hackney Carriage Driver to pay his son’s university fees and was unable to carry out any other work.

In response to Councillors’ questions, the following was noted:

•            AG would receive a suspension between 12 and 18 months. In accordance with Council policy, the total punishment was likely to be at least 5 years off the road

•            An emergency was classified as a 999 call or an urgent incoming call which did not apply in this case. It was noted that the phone wall was a standard medical check up from the hospital to AG concerning his kidney which had recently been removed

•            The panel were unable to take into account any financial hardship that AG might face

In response to a question from the Licensing Adviser, AG indicated that he might have used a mobile phone whilst driving on other occasions before the recent policy change.

The Sub-Committee then asked all parties to withdraw to allow thenm to consider thie decision.

Upon their return, Councillor Poultney advised them of their decision as follows

RESOLVED (unanimously) – that the Sub-Committee determined to revoke Mr Gill’s Hackney Carriage Driver Licence (HCDL) on the ground contained in 61(1)(b) of the Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1976, namely, any other reasonable cause, because the Sub-Committee could no longer be satisfied that he is a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

The Sub-Committee applied the Council’s own policy on using a hand-held device, whilst driving (which implements the Department for Transport’s Statutory Taxi & Private Hire Vehicle Standards) which states:

Where an applicant has a conviction for using a held?hand mobile telephone or a hand?held device whilst driving, a licence will not be granted until at least five years have elapsed since the conviction or completion of any sentence or driving ban imposed, whichever is the later.

Although the matter is yet to be heard at a criminal court later this month, in applying the above the Sub-Committee is satisfied that offending behaviour is proved to the satisfaction of the Council on the balance of probabilities and it did not consider there to be any justification for departing from the policy. 

Whilst the offence of using a hand-held device whilst driving alone gives cause to revoke the HCDL, there are also speeding endorsements that were declared on renewal but Mr Gill did not inform the Council at the time of the offences as he is required to do so by the conditions on his licence. The Sub-Committee accepts that a single occurrence of a minor traffic offence may not necessitate the revocation of licenses providing that it considers that a licencee remains a fit and proper person to retain a HCDL and consideration is given to the nature of the offence and the penalty. The speeding endorsements, the hand-held device offence, failing to notify the council of convictions at the time, along with a previous history give Members cause for concern that he has shown a pattern of offending behaviour and in making its decision public safety and protection is a paramount consideration.

The personal and financial circumstances of the applicant are not a relevant consideration in arriving at this decision.

The Sub-Committee determined to take no action on the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence on this occasion however as Mr Gill’s HCDL is revoked he cannot drive this vehicle as a hackney carriage.