Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Donna Cope.

There were no declarations of interest made.

To pass the following resolution:

That, in accordance with section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business as they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within paragraph 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act relating to any individual.

Resolved:

That, in accordance with section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business as they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within paragraph 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act relating to any individual.

The Chair invited Greg Bickerdike, Licensing Manager; Lorraine Jones, Service Lead Licensing; the Applicant, MI and the Applicant’s Solicitor, RS into the Hearing. The Chair led round-table introductions and outlined the procedure to be followed. All parties confirmed all paperwork had been received although it was requested by the applicant’s solicitor that the appendices added since the last adjourned hearing be excluded. This request was refused as, in the interest of public protection, there was no reason to exclude evidence that had been published and circulated prior to the hearing. All parties then agreed to continue.

Greg Bickerdike, Licensing Manager, outlined the report regarding an application for a Private Hire Vehicle Operator’s Licence, which had been circulated to all parties in advance of the meeting. It was summarised that the applicant was not deemed fit and proper to hold a licence. This was partially due to an attempt to transfer a licence which had expired and could not be transferred whilst one of the directors named on Companies House (MB) was in the process of being prosecuted. Furthermore, it had not been disclosed on the application being considered today that this was in progress and it was believed that the applicant had been operating without a licence for a period between the licence expiring and the applicant receiving confirmation that the licence had expired as there was evidence that bookings had been taken during this time.

It was explained that paragraph 2.3 of the Conditions of Operating a Private Hire Vehicle Company stated that a new licence would not normally be granted under these circumstances and, although the Licensing Manager had delegated authority to refuse, the decision had been referred to the Sub-Committee to determine. It was outlined that it was licence holder’s responsibility to ensure the licence was valid and renewed before expiry. 

The applicant’s solicitor stated that the applicant had not knowingly attempted to conceal the prosecution and had applied as a sole trader as the business was not a limited company and this was the only other option provided on the online form. It was stated the applicant then only answered the questions as provided by the online digital form.

The Sub-committee adjourned at 11:47 am and reconvened at 12:02 pm.

In terms of the prosecution of the applicant’s business partner it was noted that, although it was not the applicant being prosecuted, the two were sufficiently involved in the running of the business to be held to account for its actions. The applicant’s solicitor advised that the applicant wished to be solely responsible for the business going forward and that the business partner intended to retire. It was noted that whatever the motive for not disclosing the prosecution, the fact remained that it had not been disclosed and this was of concern.

Reference was made to an email from Licensing Services in which the applicant’s solicitor noted that the applicant had been advised to re-apply for a new licence as a limited company. It was confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.