To consider
an application by Mr A
(separate
copy for sub-committee members only)
Minutes:
a)
The
Chairman welcomed everyone
to the meeting. He explained 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 with the aim of protecting the public by ensuring that:
• The
person is a fit and proper person
• The
person does not pose a threat to the public
• The
public are safeguarded from
dishonest persons
• Children and young people are protected
• Vulnerable persons are protected
• The
public have confidence in using licensed
vehicles.
The Licensing Officer presented a written report on an application received
from Mr A for a hackney/private hire driver's
licence. The Sub-committee was
requested to consider the
application in accordance with the DBS record, and
the guidelines on relevant criminal
offences and convictions.
The applicant was invited to expand on his application and provide
information about the background to the offences and his personal circumstances.
He explained that all the
incidents were from his past and that
he now had
a good relationship with his former partner and was working hard to support his children.
The applicant withdrew from the room while members of the Sub-committee discussed the
application.
b)
RESOLVED - that the applicant was not currently a fit and proper person to be issued
with a hackney vehicle/private hire driver's licence from Gwynedd Council.
c)
In reaching its decision,
the Sub-committee considered
the following:
·
The requirements of the 'Gwynedd Council Licensing
Policy for Hackney Carriages
and Private Hire Vehicles'
·
the applicant's application form
·
verbal observations presented by the applicant during the hearing
·
the reference he received from his
prospective employer
·
the Licensing Department's
report along with the DBS statement
The applicant was convicted at
Gwynedd Magistrates' Court in August 2012 for the offence of destruction to
property contrary to section 1 of the Criminal Damage Act 1971. He was ordered to
pay compensation of £300 and costs of £85. In December 2012, he
was found guilty by Gwynedd Magistrates' Court on two charges of battery.
He received a suspended sentence, a community order for 18 months and costs of
£200. In October 2013, the applicant was found guilty
of a failure to comply with the requirements of a Community Order contrary to
the requirements of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. He was
fined £50 and ordered to pay £50 costs.
ch) Paragraph 2.2 of the Council's
Policy was considered. This states that a person convicted of a serious offence
need not be permanently barred from obtaining a licence, but should be expected
to be free from conviction for an appropriate period as stated in the Policy,
and to show evidence that he was a fit and proper person to hold a
licence. The applicant had a
responsibility to show that he is a fit and proper person.
Paragraph 4.5 of the Council policy was considered,
which stated that the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions)
(Amendment) Order 2002 allowed the Sub-committee to take into account all
convictions recorded against an applicant, whether spent or otherwise under the
1974 Act.
Paragraph 6 of the
Policy deals with offences of violence, and paragraph 6.5 states that an
application for a licence will normally be refused if
the applicant has a matter of common assault to be considered which occured less than three years before the application date.
The paragraph lists offences that deal with criminal damage and common
assaults. Paragraph 6.6 states that an
application will normally be refused if an applicant
has more than one conviction in the last 10 years for an offence of a violent
nature.
Paragraph 16.1 of the
Council's policy deals with repeat offending.
Firstly, it is necessary to ensure that the convictions, independently,
satisfy the policy guidelines, but that, collectively, they create a history of
repeat offending that indicates a lack of respect for the welfare and property
of others. The policy states that 10
years must have elapsed since the most recent conviction.
d)
The Sub-committee considered the following matters specifically -
The Sub-committee concluded that the 2012 offences were violent
offences. Since these offences took place less than 10 years ago, the need to
refuse the application under paragraphs 6.6 and 16.1 of the Policy was presumed. The Policy's provisions were not mandatory and
it was possible to deviate from them if the facts of the case could be
justified. In order to consider the possibility of deviating, the Sub-committee
gave special consideration to paragraph 5.1 of the policy relating to the
seriousness of the offence, its relevance, the date committed, the date of
conviction, the applicant's age at the time of conviction, the sentence given,
whether there was a pattern of offending, as well as any other relevant
factors.
It was considered that the 2012 offences had stemmed from
domestic incidents with the applicant's former partner. It was
highlighted that the conviction happened approximately 6-7 years ago and
that the Policy clearly stated that 10 years should have elapsed. The
Sub-committee was of the opinion that deviating from the Policy would be
premature, consequently, they were not satisfied that
the applicant was currently a fit and proper person to hold a hackney vehicle
and private hire driver's licence.
The Solicitor reported that the decision would be confirmed
formally by letter to the applicant.