Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest made in accordance with the Code of Conduct.

The Chairman to move that the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting during consideration of any items the publication of which would disclose exempt information

The Chairman moved, it was seconded and

RESOLVED:  That as public discussion would disclose exempt information, the following matters be considered in private.

LGA 1972 Sch 12A Paragraph 1 – Information relating to an individual

This report provides details of a complaint made against the holder of a Private Hire and Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence

(Reasons: LGA 1972 Sch 12A Paragraph 1 – Information relating to any individual)

The Panel was asked to consider whether the holder of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver’s Licence should have his licence suspended or revoked under s.61(1)(b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 on the ground of any other cause, namely for driving without due care or attention when passing a group of cyclists. 

The report of the Director of Central Services and Deputy Monitoring Officer set out details of a complaint received from a member of a cycling group regarding the licence holder’s driving and overtaking manoeuvre. 

The Panel took into account the Council’s Taxi and Licensing Enforcement Policy on determining the suitability of applicants and licensees in the hackney carriage and private hire trade.  Particular reference was made to section 1.4.4 which stated that Public Safety was a paramount consideration when processing prospective candidates by ensuring that only fit and proper persons were licensed to be entrusted to drive members of the public safely, professionally and courteously. Section 14.7.1 required licence holders to drive with care and due consideration for other road users and pedestrians and to obey all Traffic Regulation Orders and directions at all time.

The Panel had regard to the report of the Director of Central Services, the written and video representations received from the complainant, the oral evidence presented by the Licensing Officer and the licence holder and to the comments made in support of the driver by his Private Hire Operator.  Based on the evidence presented the Panel determined that:-

1.     The licence holder did not dispute any of the evidence presented to the Panel.  He confirmed that he had attended a “What is Driving Us” educational course after he was reported to the Police for driving without due care and attention.

2.     The licence holder acknowledged that, as a taxi driver, he had even greater responsibilities than those of a normal road user.  He admitted that he had made an error of judgement and apologised wholeheartedly for that.  He had attended a driving course and now recognised more than ever the need to give cyclists time and space and that he must not become complacent as a driver.  He wanted his apology to be forwarded to the complainant if at all possible.

3.     The licence holder had advised the Panel that he had been driving for a long time and had thirty years ‘No Claims Bonus’.  He said he had a clean record and understood the concerns of cyclists as he was a cyclist himself of ten years standing.

4.     The Private Hire Operator confirmed that the licence holder had a good record and had received a number of compliments from his customers, particularly the elderly ones.  The Operator was of the opinion that the licence holder was a good and courteous driver who was always ready to go the extra mile.

5.     The Panel found the licence holder to be credible and believed his remorse and  ...  view the full minutes text for item LAP 21/6