Agenda and draft minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

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 item of business as it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information falling within paragraph 3 of schedule 12A to the act relating to the business affairs of particular persons.

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 item of business as it involves the likely disclosure of information falling within paragraph 3 of Schedule to the Act, relating to the business affairs of particular persons.

To consider the application.

The applicant, TH, was present at the meeting accompanied by his legal representative, MF.

The Chair made introductions and outlined the procedure to be followed during the meeting.  The Section Leader (Licensing) outlined the report which had been circulated to all parties in advance.  Immediately prior to the meeting, the applicant and Sub-Committee had been furnished with copies of an email from LS to the Licensing Manager enclosing a witness statement in the name of the applicant, TH.  Responding to a concern raised by TH’s legal advisor regarding the lack of a written account of the Licensing Manager’s discussions with the applicant in respect of the witness statement, the Council’s Solicitor advised that the notes of the Section Leader (Licensing) in this respect should be disregarded by the Sub-Committee.

On behalf of the applicant the legal advisor indicated that, although TH had not held an operator’s licence, he had been a private hire vehicle driver for a number of years.  He added that the 2006 caution had been dealt with at appeal and had been advised by the licensing authority that the caution did not have to be disclosed as it was not on the DBS (disclosure and barring service form relating to criminal convictions) form, adding that the failure to produce his driving licence was an oversight on the part of TH.  He advised that, although TH was a driver at Westside Radio cars, he had no control or managerial responsibility.  The legal advisor pointed out that the witness statement was unsigned and TH disputed its contents; the matters at Crown Court had been dealt with in his absence and the appeal had actually been withdrawn.  He added that the applicant had co-operated fully with the Council’s enforcement team in regard to Westside Radio Cars. He added that the relationship between TH and his brother (former operator of Westside Radio Cars) was estranged.  The Sub-Committee were advised that TH had a good driving history and had taken steps to become informed of the duties of an operator.  A number of character references, on behalf of the applicant, were produced at the meeting, together with the DBS form and counterpart of his driver’s licence.

Responding to questions the applicant and legal advisor indicated that:

·         the lease agreement was currently being produced in regard to the proposed business;

·         the failure to attend the licensing authority on four occasions, in regard to a review of the private hire vehicle driver’s licence, was due to a health problem;

·         the counterpart driving licence had been misplaced, but was brought to the licensing authority when located;

·         the applicant had commented on the witness statement and these comments had not been included, the witness statement is unsigned (TH disputed the final paragraph);

·         TH answered the telephone call from the licensing authority, but was unclear as to whether the call was made by the Licensing Manager. TH first advised that he had not passed on a message to the operator regarding the contents of the call, but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.