Agenda and minutes

None.

None.

RECOMMENDED that, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1,2 and 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

It was proposed by Cllr Rollason and seconded by Cllr Gearon that the meeting move into Part II to consider the following agenda item.

It was unanimously

RESOLVED: that the meeting move into Part II to consider the following agenda item.

The Applicant attended the meeting in person, and he answered questions put to him by the Sub-Committee. The Applicant’s wife also attended the meeting and was given an opportunity to address the Sub-Committee in support of the application.

Arising from consideration of the report, evidence presented and in accordance with the Council’s procedure for hearings, it was moved by Councillor Rollason and seconded by Councillor Gearon, and

RESOLVED that the application for a new Hackney Carriage Drivers Licence be granted under Sections 59(1)(a) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976. The Sub-Committee felt that the conduct of the Applicant, supported its view that they are a fit and proper person to hold such a Licence.

Reasons for the decision:

Members noted the information set out in the Report relating to the Applicant’s caution and the reasons why the application for a licence was refused at officer level.

In answer to the Sub-Committee’s questions the Applicant explained the reasons for receiving a police caution in December 2023 and demonstrated to the Sub-Committee how the incident had occurred. This was an accident, but his wife had felt it was on purpose and the police were called. The police took the Applicant away at his wife’s request to allow them some time apart to cool down. The Applicant is not proud of this and deeply regrets what happened. He is not a violent man or someone who breaks laws and wishes the incident had never happened. The Applicant understands that he has a duty of care to the general public and will not disappoint if given the licence.

The Applicant further explained that he is trying to obtain his licence to give him the opportunity of earning more money for his family. He currently works as a security guard which required him to go through a similar screening process in order to hold the SIA licence and he had explained the reasons for the police caution to them as well.

The Applicant’s wife was then permitted to speak to the Sub-Committee and explained that they had been married for 10 years and explained that she is a nurse along with holding other positions of responsibility such as being a director. She and her husband are both involved in the community. The Applicant’s wife further explained that she had suffered from domestic abuse in a previous relationship and feels this had affected her view of what happened on the day. She made a pledge to herself to never experience abuse again.

The Applicant’s wife did not want to press charges and in fact they are currently fighting to get the caution overturned as they feel the Applicant did not understand what he was signing and the implications for this. She regrets calling the police that day knowing the impact it has had. There have been no other incidents, and they have worked through their issues. The Applicant has no other convictions and through his work as a security officer is used to dealing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 209.