Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report which asked members to determine whether the licence holder was a fit a proper person to hold a licence.

There were no questions for the Licensing Enforcement Officer.

The applicant's representative presented his case. He explained that the reason his client had not declared the incident on his application form in 2008 was that he had signed and posted the application form on 7 October 2008, and the incident occurred on the 10 October 2008, therefore the application had already been submitted before the incident.


The applicant's representative also stated that the omission of the caution on his client's recent application was not intended to deceive the Officers, it was a genuine mistake on his client's part.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer explained that although the applicant signed the application form on 7 October 2008, it was date stamped at the Council Offices on 15 October 2008, this is the process for dealing with incoming post. This meant that there was a considerable gap between the date the application was signed and received.

Discussion was had regarding the applicant's caution and the Legal Advisor explained the differences between a caution and a conviction.

A Member asked the applicant if he felt it was appropriate for a professional driver to behave violently. The applicant's representative stated that it was appropriate in certain circumstances such as self defence. The members asked for the applicant to answer the question. The applicant stated that he did not feel it was the correct behaviour but it would be acceptable if it was in self defence.

At the request of the Members, the applicant explained what happened on the night of the incident as detailed within the appendices of the report.

In response to a question from a Member, the applicant stated that he was not angry when he committed the offence.

The Chairman asked the applicant why he had not reported the caution to the Licensing department as it was clearly stated as a condition of the licence.

The Legal Advisor left the meeting at this point for two minutes to collect a copy of the licence conditions for the applicant. No discussion was had during this time.

The applicant's representative stated that his client had not reported the caution as he believed that he did not need to until his next renewal application. In response to a question from a Member the applicant's representative stated that his client had read the conditions of his licence but had not memorised them.

There were no further questions to the applicant.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer declined the opportunity to give closing remarks.

The applicant's representative gave his closing remarks and stated the following:

- The applicant was currently employed by '59 cars' and all licensing tasks were dealt with through the fleet manager to ensure that mistakes were not made.

- The applicant had a wife and three children to support, and deserved to have a chance to have a licence.

- The applicant had worked with his representative for three years and no complaints had been received from members of the public.

The Sub Committee adjourned for consideration at 7.40pm and reconvened at 8.10pm.