Agenda and draft minutes

To appoint a Chair for the duration of the meeting.

It was proposed by Cllr Gearon and seconded by Cllr Horner that Cllr Peart be appointed Chair for the duration of the meeting; and

Unanimously,

Resolved: that Cllr Peart be appointed Chair for the duration of the meeting.

Apologies received from Cllrs Atkin and Henderson.

Information pertaining to the Members' Code of Conduct and guidance relating to declaring interests can be found on the following webpage: https://www.teignbridge.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/district-councillors/councillor-conduct/

None.

The Sub-Committee noted the information provided by way of the report. In particular the Sub-Committee noted that the vehicle’s MOT certificate expires in August 2026, with no advisories. The vehicle had also passed its annual taxi inspection test on 3 December 2025. The Applicant was not in attendance and did not send a representative.

The Sub-Committee commented that the vehicle appeared to be kept in a good and sound condition although noted the age of the vehicle was now above the Council’s policy.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the vehicle was in a good and sound condition and that public safety would not be compromised by the granting of the licence sought.

Decision

Accordingly, the Sub-Committee granted the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Extension as detailed in the report with the additional condition that the vehicle undergoes a six-month vehicle test to monitor the condition of the vehicle due to its age.

The Sub-Committee noted the information provided by way of the report. In particular the Sub-Committee noted that the vehicle’s MOT certificate expires in November 2026, with 1 minor defect and six advisories. The vehicle had also passed its annual taxi inspection test on 10 December 2025 with no advisories. The Applicant was not in attendance and did not send a representative.

The Sub-Committee commented that the vehicle appeared to be kept in a good and sound condition although noted the age of the vehicle was above the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicle licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the vehicle was in a good and sound condition and that public safety would not be compromised by the granting of the licence sought.

Decision

Accordingly, the Sub-Committee granted the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Extension as detailed in the report with the additional condition that the vehicle undergoes a six-month vehicle test to monitor the condition of the vehicle due to its age.

The Sub-Committee noted the information provided by way of the report. In particular the Sub-Committee noted that the vehicle’s MOT certificate expires in November 2026, with no advisories. The vehicle had also passed its annual taxi inspection test on 10 December 2025 with an advisory. The Applicant was in attendance and was given a chance to address the Sub-Committee. The Applicant confirmed that the tyres have now been changed and provided an invoice showing this.

The Sub-Committee commented that the vehicle appeared to be kept in a good and sound condition although noted the age of the vehicle was now above the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicle licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the vehicle was in a good and sound condition and that public safety would not be compromised by the granting of the licence sought.

Decision

Accordingly, the Sub-Committee granted the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Extension as detailed in the report with the additional condition that the vehicle undergoes a six-month vehicle test to monitor the condition of the vehicle due to its age.

The Sub-Committee noted the information provided by way of the report. In particular the Sub-Committee noted that the vehicle’s MOT certificate expires in November 2026, with 3 advisories. The vehicle had also passed its annual taxi inspection test on 20 November 2025. The Applicant was in attendance and was given a chance to address the Sub-Committee. The Applicant confirmed that the advisories on the MOT had all been fixed.

The Sub-Committee commented that the vehicle appeared to be kept in a good and sound condition although noted the age of the vehicle was now above the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicle licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the vehicle was in a good and sound condition and that public safety would not be compromised by the granting of the licence sought.

Decision

Accordingly, the Sub-Committee granted the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Extension as detailed in the report with the additional condition that the vehicle undergoes a six-month vehicle test to monitor the condition of the vehicle due to its age.

The Sub-Committee noted the information provided by way of the report. In particular the Sub-Committee noted that the vehicle’s MOT certificate expires in December 2026, with no advisories. The vehicle had also passed its annual taxi inspection test on 10 December 2025 with 4 advisories. The Applicant was in attendance and was given a chance to address the Sub-Committee. The Applicant confirmed that the advisories on the vehicle test would be fixed in time.

The Sub-Committee commented that the vehicle appeared to be kept in a good and sound condition although noted the age of the vehicle was above the Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicle licensing policy.

The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the vehicle was in a good and sound condition and that public safety would not be compromised by the granting of the licence sought.

Decision

Accordingly, the Sub-Committee granted the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Licence Extension as detailed in the report with the additional condition that the vehicle undergoes a six-month vehicle test to monitor the condition of the vehicle due to its age and advisories listed.

Should the Committee wish to exclude the press and public during consideration of the items on this agenda, the following resolution should be passed:-

RECOMMENDED that, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting of the particular item(s) on the grounds that it involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

It was proposed by Cllr Peart 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 items.

The Applicant attended the meeting in person with his wife and he answered questions put to him by the Sub-Committee.

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

RESOLVED that the application for a new Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Drivers Licence be refused under Section 51 (1)(a) and 59 (1)(a) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, so as to promote public safety. The Sub-Committee felt that the conduct of the Applicant as set out in the Report, supported its view that they are not 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 revocation of a taxi licence by a neighbouring authority in July 2024. The Sub-Committee noted that the Applicant’s licence had been revoked by a neighbouring council due to failing to report a collision and being dishonest as to the circumstances of this collision. The Sub-Committee noted that the licence revocation was disclosed on the initial application made to Teignbridge District Council.

The Sub-Committee heard from the Applicant regarding the circumstances that led to the collision and in response to questions he confirmed that he hadn’t reported the collision and had been dishonest as to the circumstances as it had never happened to him before, he was unsure what he should do and worried he would lose his licence which he needs to support his family. He has been driving taxis since 2016 and regrets what happened. The Applicant continued and stated he really regrets what happened but that at the time he was under a lot of stress in his personal life, and it had all become too much for him.

In response to further questions relating to speeding offences which were not declared to the previous authority, the Applicant explained that he thought the DVLA check carried out on all drivers by Local Authorities would confirm this and therefore he didn’t need to report it. The Licensing Officer then clarified to the Sub-Committee that they always check DVLA licences for new drivers and intermittently for current drivers. The Licensing Officer also explained that there will always be a specific time frame for reporting any incidents and for providing evidence a vehicle is safe to drive, although this may differ between Licensing Authorities.

The Applicant confirmed to the Sub-Committee that the vehicle had scratches and a small dent resulting from the collision. A garage was contacted straight away to fix these. The Applicant again stated his regret for what happened and acknowledged his mistake. He is asking for a chance to prove himself and show he is a responsible person who can safely carry passengers.

The Sub-Committee thanked the Applicant for appearing before them and noted that he appeared remorseful. However, all factors combined meant that the committee did not consider that the Applicant was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 249.

The Applicant attended the meeting in person, and he answered questions put to him by the Sub-Committee. The Applicant did not have a representative.

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

RESOLVED that the application for a new combined Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted under Section 51(1)(a) and Section 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. The Licensing Officer stated that the caution was not disclosed on the application or during the driver interview.

The Applicant was given an opportunity to address the Sub-Committee and clarified that he had declared the caution to his agent who had omitted to include this. His agent had subsequently sent a letter through explaining that the Applicant had declared everything and that it was omitted from the application form in error. The Applicant further explained that he was interviewed by one officer and only asked one question which was how he should park in a taxi parking bay, but the caution itself was not raised although he was prepared to talk about it if questioned.

The Licensing Officer explained that at the time of interview they were not aware of a caution as the DBS certificate had not been received, and it had not been declared. The Applicant stated that at this point he was unaware that the caution had not been disclosed and felt that it was unreasonable to expect him to raise this again. The Applicant also noted that the agent’s letter did not appear to have been included as part of the report, although the omission was mentioned in the officer’s presentation at the start of the hearing.

The Licensing Officer explained to the Sub-Committee the process of submitting an application and felt that the Applicant should maybe have mentioned the caution during the interview. The Applicant then confirmed he had not been asked any questions at interview and that the interviewee had said she didn’t know what she was doing because it was new and that whilst he does not like to acknowledge the caution, he was prepared to speak about it if questioned. He had been upfront with his agent who had said it should not be an issue, but they would disclose it in any event.

The Sub-Committee asked the Licensing Officer the process of the interview as if an Applicant is not asked specific questions, then they wouldn’t necessarily expect to answer or bring the issue up. The Licensing Officer explained that public safety is paramount, and the driver’s interview is not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 250.