To consider
an application by Mr A
(separate
copy for sub-committee members only)
Minutes:
The Chairman welcomed everyone
to the meeting. He highlighted that
the decision would be made in accordance with
Gwynedd Council's licensing
policy. It was noted that the purpose of the policy was to set guidelines for the criteria
when considering the applicant's application and the aim
was to protect the public
by ensuring that:
• A person is a fit and
proper person
• The person does not
pose a threat to the public
• That the public are safeguarded from dishonest persons
• The safeguarding of children
and young people
• The safeguarding of vulnerable
persons
• The public have confidence in their use of licensed vehicles.
The applicant was invited to expand on his application and provide
information about the background of the offence and also his personal
circumstances. Mr A noted that his behaviour
was out of character and that he was
not a violent person.
He regretted what had happened and had been annoyed for some time by the victim. He added that he had
a quality taxi company, that he employed
local drivers and his priority
was to retain the business.
The video was shown to the Sub-committee and
the applicant explained the
incident.
The applicant withdrew from the room whilst the Sub-committee members discussed the application.
RESOLVED that the applicant was a fit and proper person to be issued
with a hackney vehicle/private hire driver's licence from Gwynedd Council.
In reaching their decision, the Sub-committee considered the following:
• the requirements of the
'Gwynedd Council's Licensing
Policy for Hackney Carriages
and Private Hire Vehicles'
• the applicant's
application form
• verbal observations, documents, photographs submitted by the applicant during the hearing
• reference letters received supporting the applicant's
application.
• the Licensing Department's report along with the DBS statement disclosing convictions.
Specific consideration was given to the following matters.
The applicant had received a formal warning from North Wales Police (May
2018) on a charge of assaulting a person
contrary to section 39 of the Criminal
Justice Act 1988.
Paragraph 2.2 of the Council's Policy was considered, this states that
a person with a conviction for a serious offence
need not be automatically
barred from obtaining a licence, but would
normally be expected to remain free of conviction for an appropriate period as stated in the Policy, and to show evidence
that he/she
is a fit and proper person
to hold a licence. The applicant has a responsibility to show that he/she is a fit and proper person.
Paragraph 2.3 of the Policy was considered, where reference is made to formal warnings.
Paragraph 6 of the Policy addresses offences of violence and paragraph 6.2
notes that an application where an applicant who has been found guilty of
violence-related offences is unlikely to receive a licence until they have been
free from such convictions for at least three years.
Paragraph 6.5 of the Policy states that
an application for a licence will
usually be refused if the applicant has a matter to be considered (including warnings) for common
assault that is less than three years prior to the date of application.
The Sub-committee concluded
that the warning dating from 2018 was in relation to a violent offence. It was noted that the warning had occurred less than 6 months ago and
was therefore within three years. In accordance with paragraph 6.5 of the Policy, and the recommendation of the Licensing Manager, the initial considerations were in favour
of refusing the application. However, the Sub-committee was also aware that the Policy was only a guide, and that
it was possible to deviate from it if there
was justification.
The Sub-committee determined that the circumstances of this application justified a deviation from the Policy, for the following reasons:
·
That the applicant had shown
remorse for the assault
·
The incident was out of character and this was highlighted
in the many reference letters received supporting the applicant's application
·
That
there was no record of any conviction or warning against
the applicant as noted on
the DBS record
·
That
the applicant was already under caution by the
Police and was therefore aware not to breach the law again
·
That
the attack was not a
violent one against the public, but rather against another competitor in the taxi industry.
·
The
victim of the attack was not without blame. The attack had been provoked, in a location that had CCTV coverage
·
The
attack had arisen in the context of a lengthy campaign of harassment and provocation by the victim
of the attack
·
An
honest explanation was given as to why the applicant had not appealed against the decision (11.05.18)
to remove his licence - he was going
through a difficult personal time regarding his son's health.
The Solicitor reported
that the decision would be confirmed
formally by letter sent to
the applicant and the Licensing
Unit would be in contact to
confirm the licence documentation.