To consider
an application by Mr A
(separate
copy for sub-committee members only)
Minutes:
a)
The
Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. She 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 highlighted that the 1988 conviction was one that had
occurred when he was in his teens and he had not been in any sort of trouble
since. He added that the 1989 conviction was not relevant to him and he
presented a letter from the Disclosure and Barring Service (dated 26.9.19)
confirming this. He also noted that an amended certificate
would be sent to him.
The applicant withdrew from the room while members
of the Sub-committee discussed the application.
b)
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.
c)
In
reaching its decision, the Sub-committee considered the following:
·
the
requirements of 'Gwynedd Council's Licensing Policy for Hackney Carriages and
Private Hire Vehicles'
·
the
applicant's application form
·
verbal
observations presented by the applicant during the hearing
·
the
Licensing Department's report along with the DBS statement
ch) The applicant was
found guilty by Menai Bridge Magistrates' Court in September 1988 on two
charges - one of assault causing bodily harm contrary to Section 47 of the
Offences Against the Person Act 1861, and one charge of affray contrary to
Section 3 of the Public Order Act 1986. He received a fine of £400.00 and an
order to pay costs of £47.00.
According to the applicant's DBS statement he had a conviction (March 1989) for
three charges of shoplifting, contrary to section 1 of the Theft Act 1968. However, he confirmed at the hearing that
this record had been included in error and he presented a letter to the
Sub-committee from the DBS confirming that the disclosure included an error.
d)
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 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 has 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 addresses violent offences. Paragraph 6.1
states that licensed drivers have close regular contact with the public
therefore the sub-committee should adopt a robust stance with those who have
offences involving violence. Paragraph 6.2 states, that anyone who has been
found guilty of violence-related offences is unlikely to receive a licence
until they have been free from such a conviction(s) 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 for common assault that is less than three years prior to the
date of application. The paragraph lists offences and common assault is
included in the list.
Paragraph 8.0 of the
Policy, which addresses dishonesty offences, was considered together with
paragraph 8.1 that states that a serious view is taken of any conviction
involving dishonesty. Paragraph 8.2
notes that an application would normally be refused where the applicant/licence
holder has a conviction(s) for an offence listed, and that the conviction was
received less than three years prior to the date of application. It was noted
that the list of offences included burglary, amongst other offences.
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.
dd)
The Sub-committee determined that the 1988 offences
were violent offences. However, as these offences had occurred over 30 years
ago, beyond the period of 3 years, paragraphs 6.2 and 6.5 of the Policy were
irrelevant, and there was no reason to refuse the application. In weighing up
the 1989 conviction for the purposes of the application, it was noted that the
letter received from the Disclosure and Barring Service (dated 26.7.19) did not
note the error appropriately, and therefore the applicant's statement was
accepted. However, as the offence had
occurred over 30 years ago, this would not have led to refusal of the
application, neither independently under paragraph 8.2, or collectively with
the 1988 conviction under paragraph 16.1 as it was beyond the appropriate
periods.
The Sub-committee
was of the opinion that the applicant was 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.