Agenda item

To review an existing Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers Licence

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

The Driver addressed the Panel and said that they were aware that it was illegal to answer the phone whilst driving, but they felt they needed to take the call as it was from work.

The Driver’s partner added that the fleet of vehicles were issued with unreliable hands-free equipment. Furthermore, the call which the Driver received was not relevant. They concluded by saying that she was an asset to the company, and regularly worked a lot of overtime.

In response to questions from members, the Driver clarified that the phone was in a hands-free system, and she did try to cancel the call when she was not able to make a satisfactory connection. However, as she was required to answer incoming calls from her employer as it may regard information about her jobs, she continued to take the call. The call was however not important as it was regarding a quiz night outside of work hours.

The meeting was adjourned at 14:24 for the Panel to retire to make their decision.

The meeting was reconvened at 14:44

Decision Notice

The matter before the Panel today is for a review of HC/PHV driver’s licence. The Driver is employed on school and social care contract driving.  She appeared before us today with her partner.

We are charged with determining whether she is considered ‘fit and proper’ to continue holding the licence, and depending on our determination upon that issue, we may impose any of the following sanctions:

·         No further action

·         A suspension of the licence for a prescribed period

·         Revocation of the licence

We start with the law, namely Part II of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

S 51 thereof states:

51(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part of the Act, a district council shall, on the receipt of an application from any person for the grant to that person of a licence to drive private hire vehicles, grant to that person a driver’s licence:

Provided that a district council shall not grant a licence

(a)  Unless they are satisfied

(i)            That the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a driver’s licence.

This responsibility is ongoing, and whether the Driver remains a fit and proper person is what we must decide today.

S61 goes on to state:

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 a driver has the right of appeal to a Magistrates Court

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 she, the background documents annexed thereto.

The facts of the matter are as follows:-

In April 2023 the Driver advised the Licensing Department by email that she had recently been “pulled over” by the police as she had been observed to have a mobile phone in her hand. In May 2023 the Driver notified the Licensing Department of the outcome which was that her DVLA licence would be endorsed with 6 penalty points. 

 Point 2.27 of the ‘Policy on deciding the suitability of applicants and licensees in the hackney and private hire trades’ states ‘Where an applicant has a conviction for using a hand-held mobile telephone or a hand-held device whilst driving, a licence will not be granted until at least 5 years have elapsed since the conviction or completion of any sentence or driving ban imposed, whichever is the later’

 Furthermore, in reference to existing licence holders, point 2.41 of the policy further states:-

‘As public trust and confidence in the overall safety and integrity of the system of taxi licensing is vital, where a licence holder has received a conviction for any category of offences detailed above, their licence(s) will be revoked’.

As a result the Driver was advised by email that her licence would be referred to Committee to consider possible suspension or revocation as, once her DVLA licence had been endorsed with 6 points for a CU80 offence, she would no longer meet the Council’s suitability standards. The Driver was invited to submit a statement explaining what had happened and explain why she felt she was still a ‘fit and proper person’ to hold a licence. She replied explained that she had been called out for an overtime run for two passengers needing transport. She was travelling alone on her way to the pickup when she received a call from her employer.

Her mobile phone was on hands free in a suitable holder she but was unable to hear what was being said, and as she didn’t know the nature of the call, which could have been a change of route or passenger list, she tried to press the speaker option on the phone which was still in the holder on the dashboard. This was not practicable, and so she took the phone out of the holder to press the speaker button and then immediately put the phone into the door card whilst on loudspeaker. By an unfortunate co-incidence it was then she was seen by the police and pulled over. In June 2023 the Driver advised us that the 6 points were now on her DVLA licence and provided a share code for the Council to check. All these documents are before us

The Driver no longer meets the suitability standards for licensed drivers. Mobile phone offences are regarded very seriously by the legislature and by the Council given the number of serious accidents that occur as a result of this distraction. The Driver accepts that it was a mistake to pick up the phone, and has attended a formal disciplinary meeting with her employer regarding the matter. She has read and understood the terms of her employment and licence contracts and would not do the same thing again.

We have read all the papers before us most carefully and we have listened to what the Driver has said to us. Their partner also spoke to us in support of what she had to say, and in response to a question he confirmed he does not work for the same company. The Driver told us that the hands free facility control on the wheel of her vehicle does not often work, but since the incoming call was from her office she felt obliged to take the call in case it was relevant to her journey. In answer to our questions, she further confirmed that she had received no training from her operator and admitted she had learned more from the police officer who had pulled her over than from her employer. She freely admitted that what had happened was wholly her fault, that she had learned her lesson and that it would not happen again.

In reaching our decision, we are mindful of the provisions of the Council’s Suitability Policy, a copy of which is before us. It 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.

Appendix A is more specific, and we quote the relevant provisions here:

2.2 It is important to recognise that once a licence has been granted, there is a continuing requirement on the part of the licensee to maintain their safety and suitability. The licensing authority has powers to take action against the holder of all types of licence (drivers, vehicle and operators) and it must be understood that any convictions or other actions on the part of the licensee which would have prevented them being granted a licence on initial application will lead to that licence being revoked.

2.7These guidelines do not replace the duty of the licensing authority to refuse to grant a licence where they are not satisfied that the applicant or licensee is a fit and proper person….

2.9 A driver has direct responsibility for the safety of their passengers, direct responsibility for the safety of other road users and significant control over passengers who are in the vehicle. As those passengers may be alone, and may also be vulnerable, any previous convictions or unacceptable behaviour will weigh heavily against a licence being granted or retained.

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 she is not, then our duty is clear – we should revoke the licence. As we have already said, mobile phone offences are regarded so seriously that they have a discrete section of the Council’s policy dealing specifically with them.

We have listened to the Driver, and we have read and considered the other material before us. However, we cannot ignore the fact that this is a mobile phone offence and she was driving a licensed vehicle, though there were no passengers being carried at the time.

We have carefully considered whether the Driver remains a fit and proper person to hold an HC/PHV driver’s licence and sadly we have to conclude that she is not. More accidents occur over any given time period as a result of mobile phone usage than drink driving, and Parliament has tightened the parameters of the offence further to cover usage while the vehicle is stationary but the engine is running. We have heard what the Driver has had to say but the fact remains, this is the time she was caught and we cannot run the risk of a repeat offence. Sadly, we are left with no choice but to revoke her licence. We regard mobile phone offences as being very serious given the incidence of accidents and that revocation is therefore with immediate effect in the interests of public safety.

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. During that period and until the determination of an appeal she would normally be allowed to continue driving. However, in this case her licence has been revoked with immediate effect on the grounds of public safety and this period of grace does not apply: she has not brought her badge with her today but she should hand it into her operator tomorrow and if she has a licensed vehicle in her custody they must collect it. Only a licensed driver may drive a licensed vehicle.

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