Agenda item

To review an existing Private Hire Driver’s Licence.

The Licensing and Compliance Officer gave a summary of his report which requested that Members determine whether the driver was “Fit and Proper” to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s Licence.

It was noted that the driver was not in attendance at the hearing, but a written statement had been submitted.

In response to questions, the Licensing and Compliance Officer clarified the following:

• The driver had not complied with Council policy twice since they received their Private Hire Driver’s Licence in October 2022.
• The first incident occurred during a multiagency taxi check outside of a school when the vehicle was not displaying any council door signs. For this, and other issues, the vehicle was suspended.
• The second offence took place outside of an Adult Day Centre where the same vehicle was not displaying any door signs or their badge; however it was in the vehicle.
• The Driver was employed in by an operator licensed by Uttlesford which held a school contract with Hertfordshire County Council. 
• The agencies involved during the initial spot check included the Police, several other Local Authorities and the DVSA.

Meeting adjourned at 13:39 for the Panel to retire to make their decision.

The meeting was reconvened at 13:56

DECISION NOTICE

The matter before the Panel today is for a review of HC/PHV driver’s licence. He is employed by an operator licensed by the Council

We consider the provisions of Part II of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. S 61 thereof states :

A district council may suspend or revoke a driver’s licence for:

(a)  That since the grant of the licence he has-

(i)            Been convicted of an offence involving dishonesty, indecency or violence: or

(ii)          Been convicted of an offence under or has failed to comply with the provisions of the Act of 1847 or of this part of the Act: or

(b)  Any other reasonable cause.

In the event of a licence being revoked or suspended a driver has the right of appeal to a Magistrates Court

The Driver has not attended before us today but has written into the Council. We have read that letter carefully. His licence is to be considered by us because of two identical breaches of condition taking place on 12^th January 2023 and 25th April 2023. Both incidents were witnessed by Council officers.

The facts are as follows. On Thursday 12^th January 2023 during a multiagency taxi check organised by Hertfordshire Police and attended by Mr Paul Wright an Uttlesford Licensing Compliance Officer. He was the driver of an Uttlesford licenced private hire vehicle), on which occasion the vehicle was not displaying any council door signs. For this and other issues the vehicle licence was suspended and the documentation is before us. The Driver has received copies.

On Wednesday 25^th January 2023, email correspondence was received from his employer showing that door signs were now affixed to the vehicle. They included photographs and these are within our bundle.

On Tuesday 25^th April 2023 Mr Wright saw the Driver again, who was driving the same Private Hire Vehicle. Once more, the vehicle was not displaying any door signs. Mr Wright issued a minor works form and advised that the signs needed to be on the vehicle at all times. Again, this document is before us.

On Friday 22^nd May 2023 the Driver and Mr Wright met using Teams. The Driver said that he could not remember very much about the incident in January. He said that he remembered being spoken to in April, and that later the door signs were found in the rear of the vehicle. He also said that he kept the vehicle at his home address although it belonged to the operator, who lived nearby so was able to collect it at any time. He said that the door signs had been made magnetic, but he had not been involved in doing it.

The Driver was informed that his licence was being referred to the Licensing Committee for consideration of revocation or suspension. He was invited to add anything further to what he had already stated. Appendix J of the Council’s Licensing Policy relating to the Hackney Carriage and Private Hire trades direct how proprietors/drivers will display the door signs. It is clearly illustrated and again, we have a copy before us. The requirement that licensed vehicles are clearly badged is a measure taken for the protection of the public. The Council licenses many vehicles that do not work within the geographical district of Uttlesford and it is regarded as very important that members of the public with concerns know who we are and who they should contact to report them.  

Para 1.3 of this Council’s Suitability policy is clear:

“If a licence holder falls short of the fit and proper standard at any time the licence should be revoked or not renewed on application to do so”

We have had the opportunity of reading the officer’s report in this case, a copy of which has been served on the Driver and we have also seen, as has he, the background documents annexed thereto.

The Council’s Suitability Policy states that the overriding aim of any Licensing Authority when carrying out its functions relating to the licensing of Hackney or Private Hire Drivers, Vehicle Proprietors and Operators must be the protection of the public and others who use (or can be affected by) Hackney Carriage and Private Hire services. We agree. That is why we require licensed vehicles to be clearly badged and this is not an isolated occurrence.

We take this responsibility seriously. The primary function of this Committee is the protection of the travelling public. The legislation makes this clear as does the case law and all authority in the area. Our role is to determine whether or not a person remains a fit and proper person to hold a HC/PHV licence, and if we consider that he is not, then our duty is clear – we should revoke the licence. If we do not think the failure serious enough to justify revocation, we do have power to suspend the licence.

We have read the Driver’s letter, and we have read and considered the other material before us. We note he says that the door signs have now been permanently affixed to all vehicles operated by his employer and apologises for his absence: he states he has to collect disabled children from school and continuity of service is considered to be important for them. We do feel that he could have requested a deferral of this hearing and observe that generally the Council does try to accommodate such requests.

We are also mindful that this is not a single, isolated incident and that the first episode took place at a time when the Driver had only recently completed his mandatory driver training. He must have known what the Council required of him

We therefore have to consider whether the Driver remains a fit and proper person to hold an HC/PHV driver’s licence; and if we do, whether his failures merit a lesser sanction than revocation.

We have concluded, since this is a repeat offence, that the Driver’s licence should be suspended for a period of 21 days. This suspension will commence on 22^nd July 2023 and last until 13^th August 2023. We are mindful of the appeal window and that the commencement of the suspension co-incides with the beginning of the school holiday. Since the Driver is employed upon school contract work, the children he drives will not be affected by the suspension of his licence, only him. We also recommend, but without having any power of compulsion, that he repeats the Green Penny training course.

The Driver has a right of appeal to the Magistrates Court against this sanction and this right must be exercised within 21 days of the date of our decision. That is why the suspension does not begin for more than three weeks, that  is until the expiry of those 21 days, and until the conclusion of any subsequent appeal.

The Driver will receive a letter/email from the Licensing Department with a copy of our decision and explaining his appeal rights.