Agenda item

The Chair invited Elaine Moreton, Section Leader (Licensing) and the Applicant (SM) into the Hearing, made introductions and outlined the procedure to be followed.

The Section Leader (Licensing), outlined the report regarding an application for a Private Hire Driver Licence, which had been circulated to all parties in advance of the meeting.  The matter had been referred to the Sub-Committee in accordance with Guidelines Relating to Relevance of Convictions and Breaches of Licence Conditions, specifically paragraphs 5.1.3 (b), 5.1.12 (b), 5.1.13 (a) and 5.1.1 (a).

All parties were invited to question the Section Leader (Licensing) on the report.  No questions were asked.

SM confirmed that the information contained within the report was accurate.

The Chair invited SM to make representations.

SM said that he was grateful for the opportunity to help the Sub-Committee to see for who he was today rather than who he was in the past.

At the time that he was convicted for carrying a lock knife he was 18 years old, immature and growing up in a rough area but that was no excuse. He was now married with 3 kids and was the sole provider for the family, working 2 jobs – 3 days in a garage and 3 days delivering fast food.  He had matured with age and saw things differently now he had children.  That he currently worked 2 jobs to make ends meet showed that he would pit the hours in should he be granted a Licence.

With regard to his conviction for Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm, there was noise outside his house at 4 am so he went outside to see if everyone was ok and to diffuse the situation.  There were two drunk men and SM threw a punch at one of them.  His neighbour had been hit first but he hadn’t been hit.  It was out of character for him to throw a punch, he had tried to diffuse the situation but the outcome was different.

He had paid for his mistakes and he would respect the decision of the Sub-Committee.

All parties were invited to question the Applicant on his submission.

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, SM stated the following:

·     The 4 inch lock knife was on a keyring and had been purchased from Birmingham market.  He hadn’t realised it was illegal.  It was discovered by the Police during a routine stop and search, they saw it dangling from the ignition.

·     It would not have been better if it had been a smaller knife but he wouldn’t have been convicted.

·     He had also bought a BB gun from Birmingham market.  It was in his car in a bag with the receipt when the Police found it.

·     The stop and search happened at round midday.  He had matured around 5 years ago.  He got marries 4 years ago.

·     He acknowledged that 200 hours of community work and a £300 fine were towards the top level of punishment that could be received and indicated that his ABH conviction was for a serious matter.  He said that he had punched the victim, making his nose bleed.

·     His 2005 driving convictions occurred when he only held a provisional driving licence.

·     He was unemployed when he received the knife and BB gun convictions.  They had been intended for garden use.

·     He acknowledged that rather than call the Police, he had chosen to put himself in conflict by intervening in the altercation outside of his hiuse.

No questions were asked by the Section Leader (Licensing).

In response to questions from the Lead Lawyer, SM stated the following:

·     The ABH conviction was downgraded as he pleaded guilty.  He was the only person involved that was prosecuted.

The Chair invited SM to make a final statement.  SM said that he had made mistakes.  He had said that he had matured but the Sub-Committee had said that he hadn’t.  He understood their concerns as public safety was their priority.  The things that he had done were wrong and 100% out of character and he didn’t see those things happening again regardless of his job.  He was sure that the Sub-Committee would make the right decision.

With the agreement of the Chair, a letter of support from his local Ward Councillor was circulated.

SM and the Section Leader (Licensing) left the room to allow the Sub-Committee to determine the matter.

The Chair invited SM and the Section Leader (Licensing) back into the Hearing.

The Chair detailed the decision of the Sub-Committee.

Resolved:     That, having considered all the evidence presented at the Hearing, both written and oral, the Sub-Committee is not satisfied that SM a fit and proper person and therefore, in accordance with Section 51 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, have decided not to grant SM a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence.  This decision is made in accordance with paragraphs 5.1.3 (b), 5.1.12 (b), 5.1.13 (a) and 5.1.1 (a) of the guidelines relating to relevance of convictions and breaches of licence conditions agreed by the Licence Committee on 25 July 2012.

The Applicant has a right of appeal, against the decision of the Sub-Committee, to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of receipt of this decision.

SM and the Section Leader (Licensing) left the room.