Agenda and minutes

To resolve that the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the attached report, because it is likely that there will be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 7 in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Resolved:-                That the public be excluded from the meeting during

consideration if the following matter because it is likely that there will be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1,2 and 7 contained within Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972

To receive declarations of interest from Members on items included in this agenda.

There were no declarations of interest stated.

There were no apologies.

Driver – Mr RN

The Committee considered an application for the renewal of a Dual Driver’s Licence from Mr RN.

Mr RN was accompanied by his local Councillor who spoke on his behalf.

Mr RN had not been in a licenced vehicle at the time of the offence and explained the circumstances as to why it occurred.  The Committee accepted the explanation.

Resolved:     That Mr RN’s application for  renewal of a Dual Hackney

Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted along with a written warning as to his future conduct.

Driver – Mr SM

The Committee considered a renewal driver application from Mr SM.

Mr SM was not in attendance but the Committee agreed to hear the application in his absence.

The Council’s Licensing Administration Team Manager, Mr Matt Burton advised Members of the offence committed.

Resolved:                 That, upon receipt of the completed Notification of

Convictions form,  Mr SM’s application for  renewal of a Dual Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted.

Driver – Mr MK

The Committee considered a renewal driver application from Mr MK

Mr MK was accompanied by a legal representative who spoke on his behalf.

This was Mr MK’s first offence and he was deeply embarrassed.  Although he was in a licenced vehicle at the time of the offence, he was not carrying passengers.  A misunderstanding of procedures was the reason for not reporting the offence to the Council.

The Committee accepted the explanation provided.

Resolved:                 That Mr MK’s application for  renewal of a Dual Hackney

                                    Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted

along with a written warning as to his future conduct.

Driver – Mr HR

The Committee considered a renewal driver application from Mr HR.

Mr HR was given the opportunity to address the Committee.

Mr HR explained the circumstances and apologised. 

The Committee accepted the explanation.

Resolved:                 That Mr HR’s application for  renewal of a Dual Hackney

                                    Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted

for a period of six months.  After this period, Mr HR would be brought back to this Committee and, subject to no further offences being committed,  the licence would be extended for a further two years and six months.

Driver – Mr AA

The Committee considered a report regarding Mr AA who had notified the Council of a conviction that fell within the Councils guidelines for the relevance of convictions.

Mr AA addressed the Committee, and explained the circumstances of the offence which was accepted by the Committee.  However, as Mr AA had been before this Committee recently, it was felt that suspending his licence was the most appropriate action.

Resolved:     That, in view of the previous warning given, the Dual Hackney

Carriage and Private Hire Vehicle Drivers licence held by Mr AA be suspended for a period of four weeks. 

Driver – Mr RB

The Committee considered a report regarding Mr RB who had notified the Council of a conviction that fell within the Councils guidelines for the relevance of convictions.

Mr RB addressed the Committee, set out the circumstances of the conviction and apologised for the offence committed.  He was not carrying any passengers at the time of the offence and was on his way home.

Members took the explanation into consideration when reaching the decision.

Resolved:     That, Mr RB be issued with a strong written warning as to his

future conduct.

To consider any business which is urgent within the meaning of Section 100(B)4 of the Local Government Act.

There was no urgent business.