Meeting documents

Regulatory Committee (2005-2016)
Wednesday, 29th February, 2012 7.30 pm

Date:
Wednesday, 29th February, 2012
Time:
7.30 pm
Place:
New Council Chamber, Town Hall, Reigate
 

Attendance Details

Present:
Councillor G.P. Crome (Chairman); Councillors S.S. Banwait*, F. Kelly†, R. Harper, A.C.J. Horwood, A.M. Lynch, R.S. Mantle and Ms B.J. Thomson.

* Part of the meeting only † Substitute Member
Min NoDescriptionResolution
Part I
10. MINUTES
 RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 25th May 2011 be approved as a correct record and signed.
11 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
 Councillors: Mrs L.J. Brunt(sub: F. Kelly), G.L. Norman and C.T.H. Whinney
12 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 Councillor S.S. Banwait declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Minute 17 as he knew the applicant and left meeting for its consideration.
13 GUIDANCE ON CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS
Minute for Minute Number 13
RESOLVED that the Local Government Regulation policy guidance: "Taxi and PHV Licensing Criminal Convictions' Policy", as set out in Annex 2 to the report be adopted as a guidance document by the Regulatory Committee and taken into consideration when considering all current and future licensing applications (replacing the 1992 Government circulars).
14 APPLICATION FOR A VEHICLE LICENCE
Minute for Minute Number 14
RESOLVED that a private hire vehicle licence be GRANTED for a Chrysler Grand Voyager, Registration No. GL05 RPX subject to a full inspection of the vehicle being undertaken at every interim inspection when the MOT certificate was presented to the authority.

Reasons for Decision

The Committee considered the report and papers before it, together with the applicant's submissions. It noted the exceptional condition of the vehicle and the low mileage. It had taken into consideration the Reigate & Banstead Borough Council licensing policy and determined on the merits of this case not to apply the Maximum Age criteria.
15 ANY OTHER URGENT BUSINESS
 None.
16 EXEMPT BUSINESS
RECOMMENDED that members of the Press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that:
 RESOLVED that members of the Press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business under section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that:

(i) it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act; and

(ii) the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.
Part II(Confidential)
17 APPLICATION FOR A HACKNEY CARRIAGE LICENCE
  • (Attachment: 4)Agenda item: 8
Minute for Minute Number 17
RESOLVED that on the basis of the factors below, to REFUSE the application of a Hackney Carriage Driver Licence as the Committee were not satisfied that the applicant was a fit and proper person at this time.

Reason for Decision

In respect of the consideration by the Reigate and Banstead Borough Council Regulatory Committee of the application for a Hackney Carriage Driver Licence.

The Regulatory Committee considered the relevant policies of the Council, the individual merits of the application and the overriding aim of the licensing authority to protect the safety of the public. The Committee considered all papers provided with the application and the representations of the applicant. In making its decision the Committee paid particular attention to the following matters:

1. The Committee noted that the applicant had committed a significant number of offences over a period of 20 years which they considered to be a pattern of behaviour at that time.
2. The Committee noted that the applicant had remained free of conviction for 8 years and had expressed clear remorse for the historic criminal behaviour.
3. Particular Offences that were given significant weight were:
• Assault on a constable on 18th April 2002 which was considered to be serious as defined by section 6.4 of the relevant convictions policy and was within the defined period during which the policy suggested a licence should not normally be granted. The Committee considered the type of assault described by the applicant.
• Being drunk and disorderly on 29th April 2004 that the Committee also considered to be serious as defined by section 6.6. of the relevant convictions policy and relevant to their considerations.
• Using disorderly behaviour etc. on 29th July 2004 that the Committee considered to be serious as defined by section 6.4 of the convictions policy and was within the defined period during which the policy suggested a licence should not normally be granted.
4. The Committee noted that a licence was held with another licensing authority but that the relevant guidance adopted by this Council at section 19.1 makes clear that such a further licence does not lead to an assumption that a further licence should be granted, and that in any case the Committee considered that each case must be decided on its own merits.
5. The Committee disregarded any errors made on application papers.
Note: The Chairman indicated that the applicant had a right of appeal on this decision to the Magistrates Court within 21 days of the decision letter being issued.
18 PRESS RELEASE
 RESOLVED not to issue a press release in respect of Minute 17 above.
10.22 pm

Minute

Min NoMinute
13The Committee received a report informing it that the Local Government Regulation (LGR) had issued new guidance, relevant when considering an application from a person with previous criminal convictions. A copy of the guidance was appended to the report.

The Committee currently followed the guidance contained within Department of Transport Circular 2/92 and Home Office Circular 13/92, adopted by the Environmental Services Committee in 1998, a copy of which was appended to the report.

The LGR guidance did not differ in substance from the earlier guidance adopted by the Committee, however, it did expand in some detail upon offences within the various categories such as drugs, violence or motoring. It also referred to offences not covered in the earlier guidance, such as public order and racially aggravated crimes. The LGA guidance also made reference to other matters and the degree to which they should be taken into account, including cautions and non-conviction information.

The Committee noted that the guidance indicated that applicants who held a licence with one licensing authority should not automatically assume that their application would be granted by another. Each application would be determined on its own merits.

The Committee was recommended to adopt the new guidance (to replace the previous 1992 Government Circulars referred to above) issued by the LGA to be sure that its decisions were based on current policy and practice.
14The Committee considered an application for the first registration of a private hire vehicle licence which was more than four years old. The report included a copy of the application form, confirmation of the service history and photographs of the vehicle.

Council policy was not to approve applications for vehicles more than four years old at first registration. However, each application was considered upon its merits and approval may be granted by the Regulatory Committee if a vehicle was in an exceptional condition or of a specialised type.

The applicant attended the meeting accompanied by the driver of the vehicle, to speak in support of the application indicating that the vehicle was of exceptional condition and asked the Committee to take this into account when considering the application. The driver also made reference to his personal circumstances that included having been made redundant recently and that he had secured a position with a Taxi company subject to having a licensed vehicle.

The Committee followed Procedure A for the consideration of this application circulated to all those present.

The following point was noted:

• That any decision made in respect of this application would not be considered a precedent as each application was considered on its merits and the decision would be for this vehicle only.

The Committee adjourned to deliberate at 7.42pm and reconvened at 7.53pm.
17The Committee considered an application for a hackney carriage driver's licence. Copies of the application forms and correspondence from the applicant were appended to the report.

The Committee were informed that Officers had reviewed the application for a hackney carriage driver's licence having regard to the Department of Transport Circular 9/92 and Home Office circular 13/92. In view of the applicant's criminal record Officers decided to refer the application for determination by the Regulatory Committee.

The Committee noted that, as it had adopted (at Minute 15 above) the Taxi and PHV Licensing Criminal Convictions' Policy as guidance for consideration in determining applications for Hackney Carriage Driver Licences that it could take this into account when considering this application. The Committee noted that the guidance indicated that applicants who held a licence with one licensing authority should not automatically assume that their application would be granted by another. Each application would be determined on its own merits.

Annex 1 to the report was the original application. Annexes 3 and 4 to the report set out the applicant's subsequent application and a letter of mitigation explaining why he had not disclosed the relevant information initially.

It was noted that the applicant currently held a Private Hire Driver Licence issued by Wealden Borough Council. That Council had been contacted and had no comments regarding the application before the Committee.

A copy of the CRB disclosure, referred to as Annex 2 in the report, was circulated to the Committee and then collected for confidential disposal at the end of the meeting.

The Committee adjourned to read the CRB disclosure at 8.04pm and reconvened at 8.18pm.

The Committee followed Procedure A for the consideration of this application, circulated to all those present.

The applicant attended the hearing to present his application, and respond to questions from the Committee. The applicant expressed extreme remorse for the acts that had led to his criminal convictions as disclosed by the CRB check and indicated that he was a reformed character being ‘clean' from any criminal convictions since 2004. The applicant described his personal circumstances that had led to him falling into the wrong ‘crowd' which resulted in his involvement in criminal activities.

He had managed to bring himself out of this spiral of criminal activity and was now settled with his wife and family. He indicated that it was not a deliberate act to withhold information about his criminal convictions and that this was a misunderstanding as he knew that a CRB disclosure would be undertaken as part of the process to determine the application.

He apologised to the Committee for his former criminal activity indicating that he was now a fit and proper person to hold a Reigate and Banstead Hackney Carriage Driver Licence referring to his current Private Hire driver Licence issued by Wealden Borough Council in 2007 and the responsible positions that he had managed in that role. He also referred to other responsible positions that he had held recently including security work that required significant levels of trust when dealing with, for example, lost property.

He indicated that he wanted the opportunity to start up a Hackney Carriage business in the area as this was his birthplace and where he wanted to live and work. He confirmed that he would take this responsibility very seriously and maintain his vehicle to full standards.

The Committee asked questions of the applicant and sought clarification on the following points:

• Whether he had ticked ‘No' on the form in relation to whether he held any previous convictions;
• Whether he completed both application forms himself or whether someone else had assisted him with them;
• Whether the letter submitted to clarify the position was in the applicant's own handwriting;
• Seeking clarification on the age of the applicant;
• Clarification on when the applicant had passed his driving test and what type of licence he held when convicted of driving offences in 2001.

The Committee adjourned to deliberate at 9.29 p.m and reconvened at 10.17 p.m.

Note: Councillor S.S. Banwait declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application as he was known to the applicant and left the meeting for its consideration.