Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated: (1) Application 1 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been involved in an accidental collision in the early hours of the morning in February 2023. As he was heading back into town on the bypass having dropped some passengers off, a drunk man walked out in front of him. He tried to avoid a collision by swerving into the other lane but it was not possible. He was in shock and carried on driving. When he got home he realised he should have stopped, so he called the police and let them know he’d been involved in an accident. Members queried the delay between the incident occurring and Cardiff Council being notified. The driver explained that when he was interviewed by the police, they told him they would notify the licensing authority as well as his insurance. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had been convicted of 3 motoring offences amounting to 9 penalty points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver outlined the three incidents that had led to him receiving the points. One had taken place on Newport Road, where he had been distracted by a passenger who had a small child who had taken off their seatbelt, and was clocked at 33mph in a 30mph zone. The second had occurred on a country lane on the way to Newport, when he assumed the speed limit was 40 rather than 30. The third incident took place in Trowbridge, and he did not have any excuse for it. The most recent offence was in 2022 and he had not made the same mistake since. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that in each case there had been passengers in the car. Members queried why the council had not been notified until now when the third offence had taken place in November 2022. The driver acknowledged that this was an oversight on his part. He had informed his insurance immediately but didn’t realise he was expected to do the same for the licensing authority. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that information was received by the Licensing Authority alleging suspected drug misuse. The Chair noted that the driver had attended the previous Sub Committee meeting and had disputed the results of the drug test which had led to his suspension. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver recounted the events that had led to him coming before it previously. He had challenged the testing company’s results which indicated active drug use and had consistently fought to clear his name but had been unable to fund a second test for a long time. His partner had been an active drug user so he would have been exposed to the substances through her, but he had been clean throughout. He did not smoke or drink alcohol either. He had now received the results of the 12 month drug test, which did detect cocaine in his hair as the first test did, but was not able to determine whether this was from active use or exposure. He felt this sufficiently contradicted the results of the first test and proved his innocence. He was willing to do further tests if necessary. He also provided a letter from his GP which suggested there was no indication he was a drug user. The Licensing Officer outlined the report of the second test, which concluded that from these results alone, it was not possible to determine whether they were due to active use, passive exposure or residual presence from use prior to the testing period. The report also suggested that external environmental contamination was likely to be a potential contributor. RESOLVED – that no further action be taken. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee were asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence given that the applicant previously held a licence with Newport City Council but was convicted of an offence in 2023 resulting in his licence with Newport being revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been caught speeding in March 2022. A few of his friends told him to change the name on the declaration form so it didn’t look like it was him driving. This was the worst decision he had ever made, and he would never have done it if he had understood the consequences. He was interviewed first by Newport Council and then by the police, and in December 2023 he was convicted of perverting the course of justice. He received a suspended sentence and a fine, and was required to do community service. Since then, he had struggled to pay rent and bills. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that Newport had revoked his licence immediately after the conviction. He had applied to Cardiff because Newport had told him he wouldn’t be able to reapply there until 2029. Members asked how he had let his friends persuade him to put a false name down. The driver responded that he panicked and didn’t know what to do. He thought he was protecting his family by avoiding losing his licence and livelihood. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he had been clocked at 35mph in a 30 zone, having been under the impression that the limit was 40mph. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused.
The following item is confidential and exempt from publication as it contains exempt information of the description contained in paragraph 14 of Part 4 and paragraph 21 of Part 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. The public may be excluded from the meeting by resolution of the Committee pursuant to Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 during discussion of this item.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated: (1) Application 1 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been involved in an accidental collision in the early hours of the morning in February 2023. As he was heading back into town on the bypass having dropped some passengers off, a drunk man walked out in front of him. He tried to avoid a collision by swerving into the other lane but it was not possible. He was in shock and carried on driving. When he got home he realised he should have stopped, so he called the police and let them know he’d been involved in an accident. Members queried the delay between the incident occurring and Cardiff Council being notified. The driver explained that when he was interviewed by the police, they told him they would notify the licensing authority as well as his insurance. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had been convicted of 3 motoring offences amounting to 9 penalty points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver outlined the three incidents that had led to him receiving the points. One had taken place on Newport Road, where he had been distracted by a passenger who had a small child who had taken off their seatbelt, and was clocked at 33mph in a 30mph zone. The second had occurred on a country lane on the way to Newport, when he assumed the speed limit was 40 rather than 30. The third incident took place in Trowbridge, and he did not have any excuse for it. The most recent offence was in 2022 and he had not made the same mistake since. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that in each case there had been passengers in the car. Members queried why the council had not been notified until now when the third offence had taken place in November 2022. The driver acknowledged that this was an oversight on his part. He had informed his insurance immediately but didn’t realise he was expected to do the same for the licensing authority. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that information was received by the Licensing Authority alleging suspected drug misuse. The Chair noted that the driver had attended the previous Sub Committee meeting and had disputed the results of the drug test which had led to his suspension. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver recounted the events that had led to him coming before it previously. He had challenged the testing company’s results which indicated active drug use and had consistently fought to clear his name but had been unable to fund a second test for a long time. His partner had been an active drug user so he would have been exposed to the substances through her, but he had been clean throughout. He did not smoke or drink alcohol either. He had now received the results of the 12 month drug test, which did detect cocaine in his hair as the first test did, but was not able to determine whether this was from active use or exposure. He felt this sufficiently contradicted the results of the first test and proved his innocence. He was willing to do further tests if necessary. He also provided a letter from his GP which suggested there was no indication he was a drug user. The Licensing Officer outlined the report of the second test, which concluded that from these results alone, it was not possible to determine whether they were due to active use, passive exposure or residual presence from use prior to the testing period. The report also suggested that external environmental contamination was likely to be a potential contributor. RESOLVED – that no further action be taken. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee were asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence given that the applicant previously held a licence with Newport City Council but was convicted of an offence in 2023 resulting in his licence with Newport being revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been caught speeding in March 2022. A few of his friends told him to change the name on the declaration form so it didn’t look like it was him driving. This was the worst decision he had ever made, and he would never have done it if he had understood the consequences. He was interviewed first by Newport Council and then by the police, and in December 2023 he was convicted of perverting the course of justice. He received a suspended sentence and a fine, and was required to do community service. Since then, he had struggled to pay rent and bills. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that Newport had revoked his licence immediately after the conviction. He had applied to Cardiff because Newport had told him he wouldn’t be able to reapply there until 2029. Members asked how he had let his friends persuade him to put a false name down. The driver responded that he panicked and didn’t know what to do. He thought he was protecting his family by avoiding losing his licence and livelihood. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he had been clocked at 35mph in a 30 zone, having been under the impression that the limit was 40mph. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused.
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated: (1) Application 1 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been involved in an accidental collision in the early hours of the morning in February 2023. As he was heading back into town on the bypass having dropped some passengers off, a drunk man walked out in front of him. He tried to avoid a collision by swerving into the other lane but it was not possible. He was in shock and carried on driving. When he got home he realised he should have stopped, so he called the police and let them know he’d been involved in an accident. Members queried the delay between the incident occurring and Cardiff Council being notified. The driver explained that when he was interviewed by the police, they told him they would notify the licensing authority as well as his insurance. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had been convicted of 3 motoring offences amounting to 9 penalty points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver outlined the three incidents that had led to him receiving the points. One had taken place on Newport Road, where he had been distracted by a passenger who had a small child who had taken off their seatbelt, and was clocked at 33mph in a 30mph zone. The second had occurred on a country lane on the way to Newport, when he assumed the speed limit was 40 rather than 30. The third incident took place in Trowbridge, and he did not have any excuse for it. The most recent offence was in 2022 and he had not made the same mistake since. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that in each case there had been passengers in the car. Members queried why the council had not been notified until now when the third offence had taken place in November 2022. The driver acknowledged that this was an oversight on his part. He had informed his insurance immediately but didn’t realise he was expected to do the same for the licensing authority. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee were asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s License given that information was received by the Licensing Authority alleging suspected drug misuse. The Chair noted that the driver had attended the previous Sub Committee meeting and had disputed the results of the drug test which had led to his suspension. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver recounted the events that had led to him coming before it previously. He had challenged the testing company’s results which indicated active drug use and had consistently fought to clear his name but had been unable to fund a second test for a long time. His partner had been an active drug user so he would have been exposed to the substances through her, but he had been clean throughout. He did not smoke or drink alcohol either. He had now received the results of the 12 month drug test, which did detect cocaine in his hair as the first test did, but was not able to determine whether this was from active use or exposure. He felt this sufficiently contradicted the results of the first test and proved his innocence. He was willing to do further tests if necessary. He also provided a letter from his GP which suggested there was no indication he was a drug user. The Licensing Officer outlined the report of the second test, which concluded that from these results alone, it was not possible to determine whether they were due to active use, passive exposure or residual presence from use prior to the testing period. The report also suggested that external environmental contamination was likely to be a potential contributor. RESOLVED – that no further action be taken. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee were asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence given that the applicant previously held a licence with Newport City Council but was convicted of an offence in 2023 resulting in his licence with Newport being revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been caught speeding in March 2022. A few of his friends told him to change the name on the declaration form so it didn’t look like it was him driving. This was the worst decision he had ever made, and he would never have done it if he had understood the consequences. He was interviewed first by Newport Council and then by the police, and in December 2023 he was convicted of perverting the course of justice. He received a suspended sentence and a fine, and was required to do community service. Since then, he had struggled to pay rent and bills. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that Newport had revoked his licence immediately after the conviction. He had applied to Cardiff because Newport had told him he wouldn’t be able to reapply there until 2029. Members asked how he had let his friends persuade him to put a false name down. The driver responded that he panicked and didn’t know what to do. He thought he was protecting his family by avoiding losing his licence and livelihood. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he had been clocked at 35mph in a 30 zone, having been under the impression that the limit was 40mph. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.