Meeting documentation

Meeting documents

Taxi and Private Hire Sub Committee
Monday, 19th October, 2009 4.00 pm

ItemDescriptionResolution
Declaration of interests - members are reminded that following the adoption by Council of the new Code of Conduct, any declaration of interest should be made having regard to the new code. In particular, members must make clear the nature of the interest and whether it is 'personal' or 'prejudicial'.

The Monitoring Officer would like to remind members that when they are considering whether the following items are exempt information under the relevant paragraph under part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 they must have regard to the public interest test. This means that members must consider, for each item, whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption from disclosure outweighs the public interest in making the item available to the public.
1 ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN
RESOLVED THAT:

Councillor P Holland take the Chair for the meeting.
2 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
There were no apologies for absence.
 
3 DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
There were no declarations of interest.
 
4 EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED THAT:

In pursuance of Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act, and in the circumstances of the matter under consideration, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.
The officers consider that the press and public should be excluded during consideration of the following items in accordance with Section 100(a) of the Local Government Act 1972 as publicity would be likely to result in disclosure of exempt or confidential information.
5 CONSIDERATION OF A PRIVATE HIRE DRIVER'S LICENCE
The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report which asked members to determine whether the licence holder was still a fit a proper person to hold a licence.

In response to a question of clarity from a Member, the Licensing Enforcement Officer explained the process of events during the joint enforcement exercise as detailed within the report.

Although invited to, the licence holder did not wish to make any comments regarding the report or put his case forward to the Members.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer referred to the letter that had been circulated prior to the meeting from the licence holder. She asked the licence holder why he had not included the advisory note with the MOT certificate, as it stated on the certificate that one had been issued. The licence holder firstly stated that he had not received one, after further questioning he stated that he would have given it to the mechanic to rectify the faults. The Licensing Enforcement Officer asked if the licence holder trusted the mechanic with the condition of the vehicle, as it was his own responsibility. The licence holder stated that he did trust the mechanic.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer asked the licence holder why he had taken his vehicle for an MOT the day before the depot test which did not leave any time to rectify any faults found. The licence holder stated that the MOT was not due until the week after the depot test but he had taken his vehicle to be tested sooner so that it was in the best condition possible for the depot test.

In response to a question from the Licensing Enforcement Officer, the licence holder stated that he had checked his vehicle before he had been pulled over but had not noticed the bald tyre as it was worn on the inside. He stated that he did not move the tyres to check behind them during his regular checks.

In response to a question from a Member, the licence holder stated that the agenda papers stated two different addresses because he had recently moved house. He confirmed that his details held by the Licensing Enforcement Officer were up to date.

A Member referred to page 38 of the agenda papers and enquired about the reference to the use of a mobile phone. The Licensing Enforcement Officer explained that during the joint enforcement exercise on 15 May 2009, she saw a vehicle matching the licence holder's with the driver using a mobile phone. When the licence holder was brought in for an inspection she questioned him about it and he denied using a mobile phone. The Legal advisor advised Member to disregard this issue as it was not in the main body of the report.

The licence holder's employer addressed the meeting. He stated that the licence holder was a good reliable employee and he had never received any complaints regarding the service he provides. He stated that his company now operated its own garage which checked the vehicles owned by the company on a weekly basis. Employees with their own vehicles were encouraged to use the garage service for free as much as possible. The licence holder confirmed that the vehicle he used as a taxi driver was owned by him.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer and the licence holder both gave a brief closing statement.

The Sub Committee adjourned for consideration at 4.45pm and reconvened at 5.20pm.

The Legal Advisor summarised the advice given to members.

  • (Attachment: 1)Report of the Licensing Enforcement Officer
  • (Attachment: 2)Additional letter received
RESOLVED THAT:

The licence would continue until its expiry date subject to the licence holder's vehicle undergoing a monthly inspection at his employer's garage. Following each inspection the licence holder was to provide the Licensing Enforcement Officer with a copy of the report provided by the garage.

A record would be kept on file and would be treated as a formal warning.
Published on Monday, 2nd November, 2009
The meeting commenced at 4.00pm and closed at 5.30pm.

Attendance Details

Present:
Councillors P Holland, P Purver and N Smith

Officers: Mr D Gill, Miss R Levy and Miss C Gale

The licence holder was in attendance and was supported by his employer.