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 was 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 a complaint had been received stating that he behaved inappropriately and used offensive language with a passenger. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness recalled that she had booked an Uber because she was late for work when the trains were cancelled. She got into the taxi and found the driver to be chatty, which she didn’t mind. The driver mentioned having a sore neck and asked her to rub his head, resting it on the seat, and then he then made a reference to an explicit bumper sticker, making her feel very uncomfortable. She wanted to leave the vehicle but couldn’t because she was on the way to work. The interaction left her feeling intimidated and uncomfortable. After getting home and having had time to reflect on it, she decided to make a complaint. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness clarified that she was sat in the back left passenger seat, and that the driver rested his head on the headrest of the seat in front of her. She also clarified that she had made the complaint either the next day or the day after that. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver disputed that he had put his head on the seat, and suggested that the passenger could have easily left the car if she had wanted to. The witness responded that she wished she had left there and then, but she had to get to work. The driver acknowledged that he had mentioned a bumper sticker, but emphasised that this was in reference to a TV program. The driver suggested that the witness had made the complaint in order to get a refund from Uber. The witness responded that she had not asked for her fare to be reimbursed at any point, and it had not been. The driver’s representative emphasised that the driver had a very high Uber rating and no history of previous complaints. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee was 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 a complaint had been received from South Wales Police stating he had admitted committing three speeding offences and falsely completing the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) form indicating that other persons had committed the offences. The complaint also alleged that the driver was suspected of falsely completing NIPs in respect of seven speeding offences in a previous taxi owned by him and licensed by Cardiff Council. Addressing the Sub Committee on behalf of South Wales Police, the witness stated that he was made aware in January of three outstanding speeding offences involving a car owned by the driver, and suspicions around the validity of nominations made in relation to speeding offences. All three offences had taken place in December 2024, and in each case an NIP was sent to the owner of the vehicle asking him to identify the driver. Each form was returned with a different name, with addresses in Southampton and Romsey. The witness explained that none of the names provided, assuming they were real people, were insured either on the vehicle or as licensed taxi drivers. They had challenged the owner, who then named his wife as being responsible for the offences. She was also neither insured on it nor a licensed taxi driver. The driver then admitted to giving false details and to being the driver of the vehicle on each of the occasions. The witness added that they had looked at other vehicles the individual had owned, and found seven separate offences dating back to 2019, with details provided for seven different men living all across England. Due to procedural problems in the central ticketing office, he had avoided prosecution by giving false details. The driver was now on 9 penalty points and three more offences had come to light which would go to court. Members queried the further offences mentioned by the witness, and heard that the driver had committed three speeding offences of May of this year, all in his taxi. Members asked whether the police were pursuing any other action outside of the Sub Committee. The witness explained that there were some time constraints, as they had to take action within six months. There was a case for prosecution for perverting the course of justice, but it was not clear that there was value in taking it further as he was likely to lose his licence anyway due to totting up points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been driving taxis for 20 years and not had a complaint until now. His son added that while he could not deny the facts of the hearing, he hoped that Members would take into account that his father was a hardworking man who provided for his children. It was a pressured and difficult job and it was only human to make mistakes. The driver added that the three recent offences were all due to the speed limit changing from 40mph to 30mph on Western Avenue, which he hadn’t noticed. The witness clarified that the speed limit had changed there several years ago, though there had been a new camera added recently. The driver suggested that when the police spoke to him, they suggested that if he accepted the points it wouldn’t go any further, so he took the 9 points and a fine. The witness disputed that he had been misleading, and added that the police had sent him a letter explaining the results of their investigation. They could have prosecuted him for perverting the course of justice, but chose to take a different approach. The driver had lied consistently, including naming his wife when it was discovered that the other named drivers weren’t real. The driver’s son reiterated that his father was a respectful, experienced and empathetic person who went the extra mile for his customers, and asked for leniency in this case. He had lied to try and protect his livelihood but understood that this was wrong. RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had collected nine points on his licence after not noticing a variable speed limit, and he didn’t realise he had committed them until he was notified. Three of the points would expire in October. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he explained that he didn’t initially know that he had to declare the penalty points to the council, but then his brother, who was also a taxi driver, told him that he did. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had been driving since 2005 in Cardiff with no issues until very recently. He had made several mistakes when speed limits had changed and he hadn’t realised. One instance was on Western Avenue right after the change, and he was clocked at 36mph when the limit had just changed from 40 to 30. Another was for going at 29mph in a 20 which he thought was a 30, and the last one was on Manor Way, which he thought was a 40 but was actually a 30. Members asked why he had only declared this now. The driver responded that he didn’t know that he needed to tell the authority until renewal, but he knew now. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (5) Application 5 The Sub Committee was 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 six penalty points on his driving licence for failing to give information as to the identity of the driver (MS90) and failed to disclose the pending prosecution on his renewal application form. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had made a mistake on his renewal form in March, because he hadn’t been notified by the court at that point of his pending prosecution. He now had six points on his licence. Members queried the circumstances of his prosecution, and heard that the driver had been caught speeding in Newport. He was given three points and sent a form confirming the identity of the driver. He filled the form in and sent it back but they never received it, so he got a further three points. He did not receive any documents from the court about it and did not attend. The driver added that he did not have an excuse, only that he had a lot going at the time as his brother had recently passed away. He believed that he may have put the wrong address on the letter and that was why they never received it. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (6) Application 6 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that there had been three offences, one of which was on the motorway. The second one was a recently changed speed limit on Western Avenue which he wasn’t aware of until he’d been caught out, and the third was late at night, he was rushing to get home to his wife who wasn’t well, and went at 26mph in a 20 zone. Taxi driving was his livelihood and he needed to support his wife and children. Members queried the circumstances of his fine. The Legal Officer clarified that the first two would have been fixed penalties and then the third one went to court. Members asked why it had taken so long for the driver to notify the council. The driver acknowledged that he had done that too late and should not have waited until renewal. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (7) Application 7 The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had six points on his licence due to failing to identify the driver of a vehicle when requested. He had been on holiday and let a friend use his car, who was caught speeding in a 50mph zone on the motorway. He received a letter about this and explained he wasn’t driving the vehicle, and gave his friend’s details. He clarified that his friend had been insured to drive the car. After some time, he received another letter asking whether he had given permission to drive the car, but he didn’t see this letter because he lived in a shared house and someone else moved it. By the time he realised this, it was too late and he was fined more than a thousand pounds for failing to give information, as the registered keeper of the vehicle. He had decided not to appeal against the court’s decision, and had his licence revoked as he had been driving for less than a year. Since then, he had retaken the theory and practical test and got a new licence. RESOLVED – that the application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted.
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 was 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 a complaint had been received stating that he behaved inappropriately and used offensive language with a passenger. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness recalled that she had booked an Uber because she was late for work when the trains were cancelled. She got into the taxi and found the driver to be chatty, which she didn’t mind. The driver mentioned having a sore neck and asked her to rub his head, resting it on the seat, and then he then made a reference to an explicit bumper sticker, making her feel very uncomfortable. She wanted to leave the vehicle but couldn’t because she was on the way to work. The interaction left her feeling intimidated and uncomfortable. After getting home and having had time to reflect on it, she decided to make a complaint. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness clarified that she was sat in the back left passenger seat, and that the driver rested his head on the headrest of the seat in front of her. She also clarified that she had made the complaint either the next day or the day after that. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver disputed that he had put his head on the seat, and suggested that the passenger could have easily left the car if she had wanted to. The witness responded that she wished she had left there and then, but she had to get to work. The driver acknowledged that he had mentioned a bumper sticker, but emphasised that this was in reference to a TV program. The driver suggested that the witness had made the complaint in order to get a refund from Uber. The witness responded that she had not asked for her fare to be reimbursed at any point, and it had not been. The driver’s representative emphasised that the driver had a very high Uber rating and no history of previous complaints. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee was 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 a complaint had been received from South Wales Police stating he had admitted committing three speeding offences and falsely completing the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) form indicating that other persons had committed the offences. The complaint also alleged that the driver was suspected of falsely completing NIPs in respect of seven speeding offences in a previous taxi owned by him and licensed by Cardiff Council. Addressing the Sub Committee on behalf of South Wales Police, the witness stated that he was made aware in January of three outstanding speeding offences involving a car owned by the driver, and suspicions around the validity of nominations made in relation to speeding offences. All three offences had taken place in December 2024, and in each case an NIP was sent to the owner of the vehicle asking him to identify the driver. Each form was returned with a different name, with addresses in Southampton and Romsey. The witness explained that none of the names provided, assuming they were real people, were insured either on the vehicle or as licensed taxi drivers. They had challenged the owner, who then named his wife as being responsible for the offences. She was also neither insured on it nor a licensed taxi driver. The driver then admitted to giving false details and to being the driver of the vehicle on each of the occasions. The witness added that they had looked at other vehicles the individual had owned, and found seven separate offences dating back to 2019, with details provided for seven different men living all across England. Due to procedural problems in the central ticketing office, he had avoided prosecution by giving false details. The driver was now on 9 penalty points and three more offences had come to light which would go to court. Members queried the further offences mentioned by the witness, and heard that the driver had committed three speeding offences of May of this year, all in his taxi. Members asked whether the police were pursuing any other action outside of the Sub Committee. The witness explained that there were some time constraints, as they had to take action within six months. There was a case for prosecution for perverting the course of justice, but it was not clear that there was value in taking it further as he was likely to lose his licence anyway due to totting up points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been driving taxis for 20 years and not had a complaint until now. His son added that while he could not deny the facts of the hearing, he hoped that Members would take into account that his father was a hardworking man who provided for his children. It was a pressured and difficult job and it was only human to make mistakes. The driver added that the three recent offences were all due to the speed limit changing from 40mph to 30mph on Western Avenue, which he hadn’t noticed. The witness clarified that the speed limit had changed there several years ago, though there had been a new camera added recently. The driver suggested that when the police spoke to him, they suggested that if he accepted the points it wouldn’t go any further, so he took the 9 points and a fine. The witness disputed that he had been misleading, and added that the police had sent him a letter explaining the results of their investigation. They could have prosecuted him for perverting the course of justice, but chose to take a different approach. The driver had lied consistently, including naming his wife when it was discovered that the other named drivers weren’t real. The driver’s son reiterated that his father was a respectful, experienced and empathetic person who went the extra mile for his customers, and asked for leniency in this case. He had lied to try and protect his livelihood but understood that this was wrong. RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had collected nine points on his licence after not noticing a variable speed limit, and he didn’t realise he had committed them until he was notified. Three of the points would expire in October. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he explained that he didn’t initially know that he had to declare the penalty points to the council, but then his brother, who was also a taxi driver, told him that he did. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had been driving since 2005 in Cardiff with no issues until very recently. He had made several mistakes when speed limits had changed and he hadn’t realised. One instance was on Western Avenue right after the change, and he was clocked at 36mph when the limit had just changed from 40 to 30. Another was for going at 29mph in a 20 which he thought was a 30, and the last one was on Manor Way, which he thought was a 40 but was actually a 30. Members asked why he had only declared this now. The driver responded that he didn’t know that he needed to tell the authority until renewal, but he knew now. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (5) Application 5 The Sub Committee was 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 six penalty points on his driving licence for failing to give information as to the identity of the driver (MS90) and failed to disclose the pending prosecution on his renewal application form. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had made a mistake on his renewal form in March, because he hadn’t been notified by the court at that point of his pending prosecution. He now had six points on his licence. Members queried the circumstances of his prosecution, and heard that the driver had been caught speeding in Newport. He was given three points and sent a form confirming the identity of the driver. He filled the form in and sent it back but they never received it, so he got a further three points. He did not receive any documents from the court about it and did not attend. The driver added that he did not have an excuse, only that he had a lot going at the time as his brother had recently passed away. He believed that he may have put the wrong address on the letter and that was why they never received it. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (6) Application 6 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that there had been three offences, one of which was on the motorway. The second one was a recently changed speed limit on Western Avenue which he wasn’t aware of until he’d been caught out, and the third was late at night, he was rushing to get home to his wife who wasn’t well, and went at 26mph in a 20 zone. Taxi driving was his livelihood and he needed to support his wife and children. Members queried the circumstances of his fine. The Legal Officer clarified that the first two would have been fixed penalties and then the third one went to court. Members asked why it had taken so long for the driver to notify the council. The driver acknowledged that he had done that too late and should not have waited until renewal. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (7) Application 7 The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had six points on his licence due to failing to identify the driver of a vehicle when requested. He had been on holiday and let a friend use his car, who was caught speeding in a 50mph zone on the motorway. He received a letter about this and explained he wasn’t driving the vehicle, and gave his friend’s details. He clarified that his friend had been insured to drive the car. After some time, he received another letter asking whether he had given permission to drive the car, but he didn’t see this letter because he lived in a shared house and someone else moved it. By the time he realised this, it was too late and he was fined more than a thousand pounds for failing to give information, as the registered keeper of the vehicle. He had decided not to appeal against the court’s decision, and had his licence revoked as he had been driving for less than a year. Since then, he had retaken the theory and practical test and got a new licence. RESOLVED – that the application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted.
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated: (1) Application 1 The Sub Committee was 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 a complaint had been received stating that he behaved inappropriately and used offensive language with a passenger. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness recalled that she had booked an Uber because she was late for work when the trains were cancelled. She got into the taxi and found the driver to be chatty, which she didn’t mind. The driver mentioned having a sore neck and asked her to rub his head, resting it on the seat, and then he then made a reference to an explicit bumper sticker, making her feel very uncomfortable. She wanted to leave the vehicle but couldn’t because she was on the way to work. The interaction left her feeling intimidated and uncomfortable. After getting home and having had time to reflect on it, she decided to make a complaint. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness clarified that she was sat in the back left passenger seat, and that the driver rested his head on the headrest of the seat in front of her. She also clarified that she had made the complaint either the next day or the day after that. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver disputed that he had put his head on the seat, and suggested that the passenger could have easily left the car if she had wanted to. The witness responded that she wished she had left there and then, but she had to get to work. The driver acknowledged that he had mentioned a bumper sticker, but emphasised that this was in reference to a TV program. The driver suggested that the witness had made the complaint in order to get a refund from Uber. The witness responded that she had not asked for her fare to be reimbursed at any point, and it had not been. The driver’s representative emphasised that the driver had a very high Uber rating and no history of previous complaints. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 The Sub Committee was 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 a complaint had been received from South Wales Police stating he had admitted committing three speeding offences and falsely completing the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) form indicating that other persons had committed the offences. The complaint also alleged that the driver was suspected of falsely completing NIPs in respect of seven speeding offences in a previous taxi owned by him and licensed by Cardiff Council. Addressing the Sub Committee on behalf of South Wales Police, the witness stated that he was made aware in January of three outstanding speeding offences involving a car owned by the driver, and suspicions around the validity of nominations made in relation to speeding offences. All three offences had taken place in December 2024, and in each case an NIP was sent to the owner of the vehicle asking him to identify the driver. Each form was returned with a different name, with addresses in Southampton and Romsey. The witness explained that none of the names provided, assuming they were real people, were insured either on the vehicle or as licensed taxi drivers. They had challenged the owner, who then named his wife as being responsible for the offences. She was also neither insured on it nor a licensed taxi driver. The driver then admitted to giving false details and to being the driver of the vehicle on each of the occasions. The witness added that they had looked at other vehicles the individual had owned, and found seven separate offences dating back to 2019, with details provided for seven different men living all across England. Due to procedural problems in the central ticketing office, he had avoided prosecution by giving false details. The driver was now on 9 penalty points and three more offences had come to light which would go to court. Members queried the further offences mentioned by the witness, and heard that the driver had committed three speeding offences of May of this year, all in his taxi. Members asked whether the police were pursuing any other action outside of the Sub Committee. The witness explained that there were some time constraints, as they had to take action within six months. There was a case for prosecution for perverting the course of justice, but it was not clear that there was value in taking it further as he was likely to lose his licence anyway due to totting up points. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been driving taxis for 20 years and not had a complaint until now. His son added that while he could not deny the facts of the hearing, he hoped that Members would take into account that his father was a hardworking man who provided for his children. It was a pressured and difficult job and it was only human to make mistakes. The driver added that the three recent offences were all due to the speed limit changing from 40mph to 30mph on Western Avenue, which he hadn’t noticed. The witness clarified that the speed limit had changed there several years ago, though there had been a new camera added recently. The driver suggested that when the police spoke to him, they suggested that if he accepted the points it wouldn’t go any further, so he took the 9 points and a fine. The witness disputed that he had been misleading, and added that the police had sent him a letter explaining the results of their investigation. They could have prosecuted him for perverting the course of justice, but chose to take a different approach. The driver had lied consistently, including naming his wife when it was discovered that the other named drivers weren’t real. The driver’s son reiterated that his father was a respectful, experienced and empathetic person who went the extra mile for his customers, and asked for leniency in this case. He had lied to try and protect his livelihood but understood that this was wrong. RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had collected nine points on his licence after not noticing a variable speed limit, and he didn’t realise he had committed them until he was notified. Three of the points would expire in October. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he explained that he didn’t initially know that he had to declare the penalty points to the council, but then his brother, who was also a taxi driver, told him that he did. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (4) Application 4 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had been driving since 2005 in Cardiff with no issues until very recently. He had made several mistakes when speed limits had changed and he hadn’t realised. One instance was on Western Avenue right after the change, and he was clocked at 36mph when the limit had just changed from 40 to 30. Another was for going at 29mph in a 20 which he thought was a 30, and the last one was on Manor Way, which he thought was a 40 but was actually a 30. Members asked why he had only declared this now. The driver responded that he didn’t know that he needed to tell the authority until renewal, but he knew now. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (5) Application 5 The Sub Committee was 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 six penalty points on his driving licence for failing to give information as to the identity of the driver (MS90) and failed to disclose the pending prosecution on his renewal application form. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had made a mistake on his renewal form in March, because he hadn’t been notified by the court at that point of his pending prosecution. He now had six points on his licence. Members queried the circumstances of his prosecution, and heard that the driver had been caught speeding in Newport. He was given three points and sent a form confirming the identity of the driver. He filled the form in and sent it back but they never received it, so he got a further three points. He did not receive any documents from the court about it and did not attend. The driver added that he did not have an excuse, only that he had a lot going at the time as his brother had recently passed away. He believed that he may have put the wrong address on the letter and that was why they never received it. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (6) Application 6 The Sub Committee was 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 nine penalty points on his driving licence. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that there had been three offences, one of which was on the motorway. The second one was a recently changed speed limit on Western Avenue which he wasn’t aware of until he’d been caught out, and the third was late at night, he was rushing to get home to his wife who wasn’t well, and went at 26mph in a 20 zone. Taxi driving was his livelihood and he needed to support his wife and children. Members queried the circumstances of his fine. The Legal Officer clarified that the first two would have been fixed penalties and then the third one went to court. Members asked why it had taken so long for the driver to notify the council. The driver acknowledged that he had done that too late and should not have waited until renewal. RESOLVED – that the driver receive an advice letter. (7) Application 7 The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that he had a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had six points on his licence due to failing to identify the driver of a vehicle when requested. He had been on holiday and let a friend use his car, who was caught speeding in a 50mph zone on the motorway. He received a letter about this and explained he wasn’t driving the vehicle, and gave his friend’s details. He clarified that his friend had been insured to drive the car. After some time, he received another letter asking whether he had given permission to drive the car, but he didn’t see this letter because he lived in a shared house and someone else moved it. By the time he realised this, it was too late and he was fined more than a thousand pounds for failing to give information, as the registered keeper of the vehicle. He had decided not to appeal against the court’s decision, and had his licence revoked as he had been driving for less than a year. Since then, he had retaken the theory and practical test and got a new licence. RESOLVED – that the application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be granted.
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.