Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
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 Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint has been received stating that he refused to take a journey from Cardiff train station to Penarth after allegedly saying he was available for hire Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s representative asserted that the driver had not broken any rules and suggested he had had been singled out by this complaint. He was not registered with the ICO and was not legally allowed to store information about customers and their trips as he was self-employed. The Chair noted that the allegation from the witness was that the driver was asked to take someone in his cab and said yes, but then changed his mind and refused the fare. He acknowledged that Penarth was out of the Cardiff area, but the witness’ contention was that this was not why it was refused The driver’s representative suggested that the driver was not obligated to explain to a member of the public why he wasn’t able to take a fare. The driver added that the witness did not ask him whether he was booked, and just said ‘Penarth’ as his window was rolling down. He also suggested that it wasn’t a formal rank as it was only his taxi there. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness stated that he was out with his family on a day out, and as they worked their way down the rank they were turned down by quite a few cabs when he said they needed to go to Penarth. A few of the drivers told them to ask the first cab on the rank, which he did. After he turned down the fare, another driver advised him that this was not allowed, and so he made a complaint. His daughter told him that it was like that every weekend when she tried to get to Penarth. The driver reiterated that he had not heard anything from the witness other than ‘Penarth’, and would not have been able to get back in time for his next booked trip if he had accepted it. He did not have a record of it but regularly took passengers to Penarth and other destinations outside of town. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he emphasised that he had no objection at all to taking passengers anywhere they asked. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness explained that he had complained about another driver too, and this driver had not been singled out. The driver’s representative summarised that while there was an issue with some drivers cherry-picking jobs, this driver had made clear that he did not do that. He only turned this one down because he had a job booked already and wouldn’t have been able to get back in time. He had done nothing wrong legally and did not deserve to be punished. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 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 Licence given that he declared he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that his offence had occurred when he was having a very bad day. He was going through a lot of stress and his wife had just filed divorce papers. He was working as a chef and finished late, and had drunk two pints. He undertook another vehicle while it was raining heavily and was pulled over. After that, he lost everything and didn’t have any other opportunities for work. He hoped that Members would give him another chance to get back on the road and earn a proper living. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he was still working as a chef but was only able to do occasional part-time work as he did not have a car and it was hard to travel long distances. He relied on his wife and friends to give lifts but this was not always possible. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 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 had a conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had made some silly mistakes but he wanted to feed his family and children. He stated he was a businessman and not aggressive Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had re-applied for a Private Hire Driver’s Licence as he had previously owned a takeaway shop which he had sold and wanted to do something comfortable and easy. He had previously been in possession of a Private Hire Driver’s Licence in Newport (6 months) and Cardiff (just under a year). He had stopped after 6 months in Newport as he did not like travelling. He had not renewed either licence. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (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 the Authority but was convicted for taking his daughter out of the county without the mother’s consent in 2019. He was also referred to committee in 2019 and subsequently had his licence revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he first moved to Cardiff in 1994 and his daughter was born in 2012. He was then banned from the UK for 10 years and moved back to Romania. In 2014, he was accused of kidnapping his daughter. His wife moved to London and he was unable to go to his daughter’s school or doctors. His wife and daughter then moved back to Romania, and he had attended court on six occasions to try to gain custody of his daughter as she had returned from Romania with injuries. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that he had not seen his daughter for 4 or 5 years and she was now 12 years of age. He had received a prison sentence for taking his daughter out of the UK without her mother’s consent. Whilst in prison he was attacked. When he came out of prison he was not feeling well so he had handed in his badge. He informed the Sub Committee that he was now fit and well and wanted to come back to work as quickly as possible. He explained that it was just a family quarrel and there was no violence involved. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (5) Application 5 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 the authority but was convicted for totting up points on his DVLA licence. He was also referred to committee and subsequently had his licence revoked. The driver explained that he had not committed any speeding offences whilst working as a taxi driver. He had been a delivery driver with his own shop and the police had caught him on camera speeding. He now had a clean driving licence. He stressed that he had never committed any crimes and had now learnt his lesson. For one and half years had had no employment, lost his licence and lost his shop. He informed the Sub Committee that he had a security job but that only provided him with 10 days’ work per month which was not enough and asked for another chance. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that the court had given him the chance to drive despite his points and said that if he made another mistake he would receive a 6 month ban. The police then stopped him for a worn tyre and he lost his licence for 6 months and his shop. He said that he had tried to use the train but the last one was at 10.00 pm and there were no busses. Sometimes he slept on the sofa which was hard. He explained that he had lost his licence before his taxi licence and had disclosed this information in his last application. The car with the worn tyre was his only car and the one he used as a taxi. 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.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
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 Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint has been received stating that he refused to take a journey from Cardiff train station to Penarth after allegedly saying he was available for hire Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s representative asserted that the driver had not broken any rules and suggested he had had been singled out by this complaint. He was not registered with the ICO and was not legally allowed to store information about customers and their trips as he was self-employed. The Chair noted that the allegation from the witness was that the driver was asked to take someone in his cab and said yes, but then changed his mind and refused the fare. He acknowledged that Penarth was out of the Cardiff area, but the witness’ contention was that this was not why it was refused The driver’s representative suggested that the driver was not obligated to explain to a member of the public why he wasn’t able to take a fare. The driver added that the witness did not ask him whether he was booked, and just said ‘Penarth’ as his window was rolling down. He also suggested that it wasn’t a formal rank as it was only his taxi there. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness stated that he was out with his family on a day out, and as they worked their way down the rank they were turned down by quite a few cabs when he said they needed to go to Penarth. A few of the drivers told them to ask the first cab on the rank, which he did. After he turned down the fare, another driver advised him that this was not allowed, and so he made a complaint. His daughter told him that it was like that every weekend when she tried to get to Penarth. The driver reiterated that he had not heard anything from the witness other than ‘Penarth’, and would not have been able to get back in time for his next booked trip if he had accepted it. He did not have a record of it but regularly took passengers to Penarth and other destinations outside of town. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he emphasised that he had no objection at all to taking passengers anywhere they asked. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness explained that he had complained about another driver too, and this driver had not been singled out. The driver’s representative summarised that while there was an issue with some drivers cherry-picking jobs, this driver had made clear that he did not do that. He only turned this one down because he had a job booked already and wouldn’t have been able to get back in time. He had done nothing wrong legally and did not deserve to be punished. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 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 Licence given that he declared he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that his offence had occurred when he was having a very bad day. He was going through a lot of stress and his wife had just filed divorce papers. He was working as a chef and finished late, and had drunk two pints. He undertook another vehicle while it was raining heavily and was pulled over. After that, he lost everything and didn’t have any other opportunities for work. He hoped that Members would give him another chance to get back on the road and earn a proper living. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he was still working as a chef but was only able to do occasional part-time work as he did not have a car and it was hard to travel long distances. He relied on his wife and friends to give lifts but this was not always possible. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 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 had a conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had made some silly mistakes but he wanted to feed his family and children. He stated he was a businessman and not aggressive Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had re-applied for a Private Hire Driver’s Licence as he had previously owned a takeaway shop which he had sold and wanted to do something comfortable and easy. He had previously been in possession of a Private Hire Driver’s Licence in Newport (6 months) and Cardiff (just under a year). He had stopped after 6 months in Newport as he did not like travelling. He had not renewed either licence. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (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 the Authority but was convicted for taking his daughter out of the county without the mother’s consent in 2019. He was also referred to committee in 2019 and subsequently had his licence revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he first moved to Cardiff in 1994 and his daughter was born in 2012. He was then banned from the UK for 10 years and moved back to Romania. In 2014, he was accused of kidnapping his daughter. His wife moved to London and he was unable to go to his daughter’s school or doctors. His wife and daughter then moved back to Romania, and he had attended court on six occasions to try to gain custody of his daughter as she had returned from Romania with injuries. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that he had not seen his daughter for 4 or 5 years and she was now 12 years of age. He had received a prison sentence for taking his daughter out of the UK without her mother’s consent. Whilst in prison he was attacked. When he came out of prison he was not feeling well so he had handed in his badge. He informed the Sub Committee that he was now fit and well and wanted to come back to work as quickly as possible. He explained that it was just a family quarrel and there was no violence involved. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (5) Application 5 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 the authority but was convicted for totting up points on his DVLA licence. He was also referred to committee and subsequently had his licence revoked. The driver explained that he had not committed any speeding offences whilst working as a taxi driver. He had been a delivery driver with his own shop and the police had caught him on camera speeding. He now had a clean driving licence. He stressed that he had never committed any crimes and had now learnt his lesson. For one and half years had had no employment, lost his licence and lost his shop. He informed the Sub Committee that he had a security job but that only provided him with 10 days’ work per month which was not enough and asked for another chance. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that the court had given him the chance to drive despite his points and said that if he made another mistake he would receive a 6 month ban. The police then stopped him for a worn tyre and he lost his licence for 6 months and his shop. He said that he had tried to use the train but the last one was at 10.00 pm and there were no busses. Sometimes he slept on the sofa which was hard. He explained that he had lost his licence before his taxi licence and had disclosed this information in his last application. The car with the worn tyre was his only car and the one he used as a taxi. 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 Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint has been received stating that he refused to take a journey from Cardiff train station to Penarth after allegedly saying he was available for hire Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s representative asserted that the driver had not broken any rules and suggested he had had been singled out by this complaint. He was not registered with the ICO and was not legally allowed to store information about customers and their trips as he was self-employed. The Chair noted that the allegation from the witness was that the driver was asked to take someone in his cab and said yes, but then changed his mind and refused the fare. He acknowledged that Penarth was out of the Cardiff area, but the witness’ contention was that this was not why it was refused The driver’s representative suggested that the driver was not obligated to explain to a member of the public why he wasn’t able to take a fare. The driver added that the witness did not ask him whether he was booked, and just said ‘Penarth’ as his window was rolling down. He also suggested that it wasn’t a formal rank as it was only his taxi there. Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness stated that he was out with his family on a day out, and as they worked their way down the rank they were turned down by quite a few cabs when he said they needed to go to Penarth. A few of the drivers told them to ask the first cab on the rank, which he did. After he turned down the fare, another driver advised him that this was not allowed, and so he made a complaint. His daughter told him that it was like that every weekend when she tried to get to Penarth. The driver reiterated that he had not heard anything from the witness other than ‘Penarth’, and would not have been able to get back in time for his next booked trip if he had accepted it. He did not have a record of it but regularly took passengers to Penarth and other destinations outside of town. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he emphasised that he had no objection at all to taking passengers anywhere they asked. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the witness explained that he had complained about another driver too, and this driver had not been singled out. The driver’s representative summarised that while there was an issue with some drivers cherry-picking jobs, this driver had made clear that he did not do that. He only turned this one down because he had a job booked already and wouldn’t have been able to get back in time. He had done nothing wrong legally and did not deserve to be punished. RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning. (2) Application 2 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 Licence given that he declared he was disqualified from driving and had received a driving ban from the DVLA. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that his offence had occurred when he was having a very bad day. He was going through a lot of stress and his wife had just filed divorce papers. He was working as a chef and finished late, and had drunk two pints. He undertook another vehicle while it was raining heavily and was pulled over. After that, he lost everything and didn’t have any other opportunities for work. He hoped that Members would give him another chance to get back on the road and earn a proper living. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he was still working as a chef but was only able to do occasional part-time work as he did not have a car and it was hard to travel long distances. He relied on his wife and friends to give lifts but this was not always possible. RESOLVED – that the Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked. (3) Application 3 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 had a conviction contrary to the guidance. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had made some silly mistakes but he wanted to feed his family and children. He stated he was a businessman and not aggressive Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had re-applied for a Private Hire Driver’s Licence as he had previously owned a takeaway shop which he had sold and wanted to do something comfortable and easy. He had previously been in possession of a Private Hire Driver’s Licence in Newport (6 months) and Cardiff (just under a year). He had stopped after 6 months in Newport as he did not like travelling. He had not renewed either licence. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (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 the Authority but was convicted for taking his daughter out of the county without the mother’s consent in 2019. He was also referred to committee in 2019 and subsequently had his licence revoked. Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he first moved to Cardiff in 1994 and his daughter was born in 2012. He was then banned from the UK for 10 years and moved back to Romania. In 2014, he was accused of kidnapping his daughter. His wife moved to London and he was unable to go to his daughter’s school or doctors. His wife and daughter then moved back to Romania, and he had attended court on six occasions to try to gain custody of his daughter as she had returned from Romania with injuries. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that he had not seen his daughter for 4 or 5 years and she was now 12 years of age. He had received a prison sentence for taking his daughter out of the UK without her mother’s consent. Whilst in prison he was attacked. When he came out of prison he was not feeling well so he had handed in his badge. He informed the Sub Committee that he was now fit and well and wanted to come back to work as quickly as possible. He explained that it was just a family quarrel and there was no violence involved. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused. (5) Application 5 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 the authority but was convicted for totting up points on his DVLA licence. He was also referred to committee and subsequently had his licence revoked. The driver explained that he had not committed any speeding offences whilst working as a taxi driver. He had been a delivery driver with his own shop and the police had caught him on camera speeding. He now had a clean driving licence. He stressed that he had never committed any crimes and had now learnt his lesson. For one and half years had had no employment, lost his licence and lost his shop. He informed the Sub Committee that he had a security job but that only provided him with 10 days’ work per month which was not enough and asked for another chance. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee the driver explained that the court had given him the chance to drive despite his points and said that if he made another mistake he would receive a 6 month ban. The police then stopped him for a worn tyre and he lost his licence for 6 months and his shop. He said that he had tried to use the train but the last one was at 10.00 pm and there were no busses. Sometimes he slept on the sofa which was hard. He explained that he had lost his licence before his taxi licence and had disclosed this information in his last application. The car with the worn tyre was his only car and the one he used as a taxi. RESOLVED – that the application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence be refused.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.