Licences for pubs, taxis and events, anti-social behaviour and trading standards.
What councils do
Councils work with the police and others on community safety, run CCTV, license pubs, taxis and gambling premises, and deal with antisocial behaviour such as noise.
Who decides
Licensing decisions are made by a licensing committee or sub-committee of councillors, which hears from applicants and objectors.
Having a say
You can object to a licence application during its consultation period. Report noise and antisocial behaviour to the council.
Loading
By council, last 12 months
How many agenda items on this topic each council dealt with, and how many had a decision 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 Licence given that a complaint had been received stating he was abusive and threatening to a parking enforcement officer.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s representative stated that the driver regretted the way he had acted. In terms of extenuating circumstances, he explained that the driver had been having a very difficult day and getting a parking ticket was the culmination of this.
Members asked the driver for his reflections, having watched the video of the incident back, and heard that he understood it wasn’t appropriate to have reacted in that way. The driver apologised to the witness for his conduct.
The driver’s representative noted that the witness’ statement indicated that the car was unattended, which he disputed.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness explained that he was a parking enforcement officer for Cardiff Council, and had given an unattended vehicle on Albany Road an instant ticket for double parking. As he was issuing the ticket, the driver came out and challenged him about it. The driver started shouting so he activated his body camera, which also captured the 30 seconds before the button was pressed. The video of the incident showed the driver calling him a racist and a coloniser, and threatening the officer for giving him the ticket.
The witness added that while the driver was shouting, a security guard came over to try to calm him down. After a minute or two he got back in his car and took the ticket. He explained that he could appeal it and that it would cost £35 if he paid it within 14 days, at which point the driver got out of the car and started shouting again. Eventually he took the ticket and drove away.
Members asked how the incident had made the witness feel, and heard that he had been shocked. Although he got a lot of verbal abuse in his job, people normally calmed down when they were told they were being recorded, and sometimes they even apologised.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that he had paid the parking fine.
The driver’s representative emphasised that the driver was genuinely shocked looking back at his reaction in the video, which was totally out of order. It was out of character for him, and he had learned from the incident and would ensure it would never happen again.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Drivers’ licence be revoked.
(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 Licence given that he had nine penalty points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver acknowledged his mistake and emphasised that he would be more careful next time. He was aware that if he had any other offences in the next year, he would lose his licence. He had been driving taxis since 2003 with no other issues.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(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 Licence given that he had nine penalty points on his driving licence.
The hearing took place in the absence of the driver.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning, and be required to complete the ‘Introduction to the Role of the Professional Taxi and Private Hire Driver’ BTEC course within twelve months.
(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 Licence given that he had 15 penalty points on his driving licence and was disqualified from driving for six months.
Addressing the Sub Committee on behalf of the driver, the driver’s friend explained that he had been licensed since 2001 but had now been disqualified from driving for six months after accruing 15 points. He was very regretful about what had happened and had informed the council and returned his badges immediately.
He added that if he got his licence back in December, he would take extra precautions to drive especially safely. He was 65 years old but was still keen to get back to work and not rely on benefits. He didn’t have any other sources of income, as this had been his job for more than 20 years, and he had five children to look after.
Members queried the circumstances of the offences, and heard that two of them were in the same location on Newport Road near St Mellons, where a 30mph zone changed suddenly to 20mph. He had been caught going at 27mph and then 30mph by the same camera.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning, and be required to complete the ‘Introduction to the Role of the Professional Taxi and Private Hire Driver’ BTEC course within six months.
(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 Licence given that he had 9 penalty points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been a taxi driver for 20 years with no issues or complaints in that time, and this was his first time before the Sub Committee. Driving his taxi was his only source of income.
He had received nine penalty points, three of which were for a speeding offence in 2023 where he didn’t realise a speed limit on Manor Way had recently changed from 40mph to 30mph, and was caught going at 37mph.
He added that the other six were for failing to give information as to the identity of the driver. Members queried this and heard that he believed his car was in the garage at the time, but he had been unable to prove this and accepted the punishment.
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 Licence given that he had twelve penalty points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had received six points and a fine in May for failing to give information as to the identity of the driver, after he didn’t see a letter which was sent to his family’s house while he wasn’t living there.
He added that he had received a ticket on Manor Way for going 39mph in a zone that used to be a 40mph zone but had recently changed to a 30, and there was another offence where he went 55mph in a 50mph zone.
The driver’s representative added that the driver had been up front and honest about what had happened, and reported his offences to the authority as soon as possible. In his view, he was clearly responsible enough to continue driving taxis.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be suspended for 7 days.
(7)
Application 7
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 Licence given that he had 9 penalty points on the driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s solicitor explained that he had received a fine and three points for misjudging going through a light when there were no passengers in the car. He had also exceeded the speed limit on two occasions very close to each other, which the driver explained were in the same place on Newport Road near Rumney, driving towards the city centre. The limit in this area had changed from 30mph to 20mph, and in both cases he was going under 30.
The driver added that he had been driving since 2001, and had only been before the Sub Committee once in that time. On that occasion, his licence had been revoked, but this decision was overturned on appeal. Other than that, there had been no issues in the last 24 years, and he felt he was a fit and proper person to drive a taxi. He had declared everything that was relevant to the authority, and had demonstrated his fitness over a long period of time.
The driver’s solicitor added that he had another speeding offence pending, which would go to court in September. He would plead special hardship reasons to be allowed to continue driving, and wouldn’t be able to drive if this was not accepted.
RESOLVED – that the hearing be deferred until the resolution of the pending speeding offence.
(8)
Application 8
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 Licence given that he had nine penalty points on the driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had been driving for a long time and had unfortunately collected nine points recently: three for exceeding a 30mph limit and six for using a mobile phone while driving. He was still not sure what had happened with the phone offence, having received a letter about it with no pictures of details.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he explained that he did not have passengers in the car on either occasion. He never took phone calls when he had passengers because they wouldn’t like it.
Regarding the speeding offence, he explained that this was on Newport Road near St Mellons, and he had been caught going at 26mph in a 20mph zone that he thought was a 30.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(9)
Application 9
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had made a mistake some time ago when he was new in the country, and got the wrong type of insurance for his car while working as a delivery driver for Amazon. He had now sorted this out and had the correct business insurance, and wanted to drive taxis in addition to doing deliveries.
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.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 200 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter GRANTED the application; subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police.
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 Licence given that he had declared nine penalty points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had informed the licensing authority when he received the last three points on his driving licence. Each of the offences was for exceeding the limit in a 20mph or 30mph zone, when he hadn’t realised there were new cameras were in place on roads he often drove on.
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 Licence given that he had declared nine penalty points on his driving licence.
Cllr Michael declared an interest as he knew the driver personally, and did not take part in the hearing.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that each of the offences had taken place about two years ago, and involved going at 33 or 34 in a 30mph zone. He had been working late at night and gone slightly over the limit while being distracted by difficult customers.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(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 Licence given that he had nine penalty points on his driving licence but did not disclose it until three penalty points had expired.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had notified the authority when he committed two speeding offences on the same day, totalling six points. He emphasised that he had not been driving dangerously, but had gone slightly over a temporary 40mph limit on a road that was normally 50mph. Before then, he had one other speeding offence where the three points had expired in January.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(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 Licence given that the driver had twelve penalty points on his driving licence and was disqualified for driving for six months.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver apologised for his actions, which included driving at 26mph in a 20mph zone on a road he was unfamiliar with. He wasn’t in his taxi at the time, so there were no passengers. He recognised the importance of the road traffic rules and the expectations on taxi drivers, and was committed to learning more about different routes and speed zones in Cardiff.
The Sub Committee queried the circumstances of an MS90 offence where he had been convicted of failing to give information as to the identity of the driver. The driver explained that he hadn’t been in the country at the time as he was on holiday. The letter requesting the information had gone to an old address where his family no longer lived.
Members asked whether he had showed evidence to the court that he wasn’t in the country at the time of the offence. The driver said he had, along with evidence of the incorrect address. He wasn’t represented by a solicitor and accepted a fine which he was still paying. He had appealed the decision, but the fine and six month ban remained in place.
The Legal Officer suggested that the driver must not have attended court, because the £660 fine was a Band C fine on an assumed income. The driver confirmed that this was correct.
Members asked whether he was driving the car that led to the MS90 offence. The driver responded that it was a rental, and the company he rented it from took it back when he went away. Members asked whether the driver had contacted that company to say that it wasn’t him driving. The driver responded that he had not, because he lost contact with them.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked.
(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 Licence given that the driver had a previous conviction for possessing an offensive weapon in a private place.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that many years ago he had bought a replica of a weapon from an Assassin’s Creed game from a souvenir shop. The law had then changed to make items that resembled offensive weapons illegal. He wasn’t aware of that at the time, and the item had been legal at the time of purchase.
In 2023, there had been an incident on his street which the police came to talk to him about, not related to the item. The police saw it on display in his house and confiscated it, leading to him being charged. There was no suggestion that he had tried to use it or threatened anyone, only that he had been in possession of it.
He added that he had been driving taxis for sixteen years and working for Uber for eight years without any complaints, and had a very high star rating.
Members asked what the item looked like. The driver explained that it was a hatchet with an extra point on it, and it had some feathers and the symbol of the computer game. It was now legally classed as a zombie knife as it was a blade with an additional point.
Members asked where exactly the item had been, which the driver explained was only in his house rather than his car. It was decorative and was put up on a display stand. It had since been destroyed after being seized by the police. He had explained the circumstances in court and they gave him the minimum fine.
RESOLVED – that no further action be taken.
(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 Licence given that the driver had received a caution for common assault.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had declared the caution when he applied to renew his taxi licence. He felt he had learned his lesson from the incident, which occurred in the early hours in town with his ex-partner. They had argued and he had pushed her, and several months later he was contacted by the police, who gave him a caution for assault.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(7)
Application 7
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / 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 been involved in a car accident five years ago that led to the death of someone involved, and was convicted of driving without due care and attention. The accident had happened when he tried to go around a car parked on the pavement, and he didn’t see someone coming the other way and collided with them. He had reported it to the police and turned himself in.
RESOLVED – that the application be refused.
(8)
Application 8
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he had received six points on his licence for using a vehicle that was uninsured against third party risks. He was driving with business insurance which only allowed him to do food deliveries, rather than full personal insurance, and didn’t realise.
RESOLVED – that the application be granted.
(9)
Application 9
This hearing was deferred to the next meeting.
Cardiff, Community & Adult Services Scrutiny Committee,
AGREED: that the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Vale of Glamorgan, Licensing: Public Protection Committee,
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 Licence given that a complaint had been received stating that he engaged with sexual intercourse with a female passenger after an Uber-booked journey. It was also alleged that the driver made a comment suggesting that it was not the first time he had engaged in sexual activity with a passenger.
The driver did not attend the meeting. The Sub Committee were unanimous in the view that the hearing should proceed in his absence due to the seriousness of the complaint.
An officer from the Licensing department addressed the Sub Committee. Members were provided with details of the complaint and the details of the officer’s enquiries into the matter. The officer provided details obtained from GPS data which indicated that the vehicle had stayed in the vicinity of the complainant’s home for 40 minutes after the journey had ended.
The complainant indicated in her statement that the driver had stopped at a garage on route to the destination in order to purchase condoms. Following further investigations by the officer, Members were advised that GPS data proved that the vehicle had stopped at a garage on Newport Road for a short time during the journey.
Further enquires with the garage operators indicated that there was only one customer at the garage during the times in question. A till receipt in the amount of £7.15 for condoms was provided, purchased using a debit card. Officers cross-referenced the debit card with payments made by the driver at the Cardiff Hackney Office, and the same debit card was used.
Members were also provided with details of other complaints that had been received relating to the driver, including one pending allegation of assault.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked.
(2)
Application 2
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint had been received stating that he swore and shouted at members of the public and drove towards flag holders.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he was not working at the time of the incident. He had been running an errand for his mother, and his younger brother was in the vehicle. The driver apologised for his actions and stated that the incident happened on the first day of fasting for Ramadan, so he had perhaps acted impatiently.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness explained that the St David’s Day march was well-organised and the organisers were trying to manage the flow of traffic. Other vehicles were also being delayed but no other drivers acted in this way.
RESOLVED – that the driver be given a written warning regarding unacceptable conduct.
(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 Licence given that a complaint had been received stating that he used offensive language towards the complainant.
The witness did not attend the meeting.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he was working in Swansea that day but he had no recollection of the incident. He felt that he was a very experienced and professional driver, and this was supported by a number of references provided and a very high Uber rating.
RESOLVED – that no further action be taken.
(4)
Application 4
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had declared previous convictions and a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant explained that the recent IN10 offence had occurred when he had driven his wife’s car without third party cover. At the time he was unaware that the insurance policy had been updated, and he was no longer a named driver.
RESOLVED – that the application for a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be approved.
(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 Licence given that a complaint had been received from South Wales Police stating that he had committed a speeding offence and falsely completed the Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) form indicating that another person had committed the offence.
The complaint also alleged that the driver falsely completed NIPs in respect of three speeding offences in a previous taxi owned by him and licensed by Cardiff Council.
Addressing the Sub Committee on behalf of South Wales Police, PC Ben Thomas explained that a vehicle owned by the driver had exceeded the speed limit and so a NIP was issued. The form was returned stating that another individual was driving the vehicle, but the police established that the vehicle was not insured for other people to drive, and the named individual did not appear on any databases other than court records.
PC Thomas suggested that there was no evidence that the named individual existed. Further investigation of court records indicated that a different vehicle owned by the driver had previously exceeded the speed limit on three occasions, with the NIP for each offence stating that the same individual had been driving the vehicle, again without having insurance to do so.
The driver accepted PC Thomas’ statement and apologised for a serious error in judgement. He explained that on the first occasion, the named individual was his father-in-law, and suggested that he was actually driving the vehicle. PC Thomas reiterated that there were no records to prove that this individual existed.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked.
(6)
Application 6
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
(7)
Application 7
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 Licence given that a complaint had been received stating that he overcharged a passenger by using the incorrect tariff for the fare, and also did not return the correct change.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness explained that shortly after the commencement of the journey she noticed that the taxi meter was displaying ‘Tariff 2’ and queried this with the driver, who stated that Tariff 2 started at 6pm. The complainant suggested that it was 5:45pm at the time. The driver stopped the meter on route to the destination. At the destination it was alleged that the driver did not provide the correct change.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver confirmed that the meter was displaying Tariff 2. He was unable to explain why this had happened, as drivers were unable to select which tariff was used. The meter automatically set the tariff depending on the time of day. The meter had since been checked by officers at the Hackney Office and was in working order. The driver denied providing the wrong change at the destination.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a verbal warning regarding his conduct.
(8)
Application 8
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 Licence given that a complaint had been received stating that he made unwelcomed sexual conversation and references with a customer.
The driver stated that he could not remember the incident in question. He had been working as a taxi driver for 25 years without any problems. Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, he confirmed that he was no longer working for Cabs64. Cabs64 had provided a statement that indicated that the driver had been warned about his conduct on a number of occasions. The driver stated that he had only been asked not to ‘joke’ with customers.
Members asked whether joking with customers previously had including comments of a sexual nature. The driver replied that sometimes the comments were sexual. Members asked why the driver, who was in a position of responsibility, would make comments of a sexual nature when he had previously been warned not to do so.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness explained that at the start of her journey she had difficulty with her seatbelt. The driver made a number of offensive sexual comments and used atrocious language throughout the journey. He also placed his hand on her leg and moved it up to rub her thigh. The journey was a horrible experience, and she was frightened and scared that she would have a seizure related to a health condition. The driver denied touching his passenger.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be revoked.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 200 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter GRANTED the application; subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police.
The Sub Committee heard from the applicant and listened to all the evidence and submissions and all the written material. Members considered the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 Guidance, the Statement of Licensing Policy and Cumulative Impact Assessment. The Sub Committee heard the oral representations from a local resident and the local ward member.
Having carefully considered the representations the Sub Committee did not feel that there is sufficient evidence that the granting of this licence will undermine the licensing objectives. The Sub Committee was encouraged by the fact that the applicants have been trading for 4 months without complaints.
Members considered the comments relating to the use of Westgate Street after 9pm and how the granting of this licence could create a precedent, but considered that each application must be decided on its own merits.
The Sub Committee therefore resolved to grant the licence subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 200 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter GRANTED the application; subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police.
The Sub Committee heard from the applicant and listened to all the evidence and submissions and all the written material. Members considered the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 Guidance, the Statement of Licensing Policy and Cumulative Impact Assessment. The Sub Committee heard the oral representations from the local ward member.
Having carefully considered the representations the Sub Committee did not feel that there is sufficient evidence that the granting of this licence will undermine the licensing objectives.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 200 and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter:
GRANTED the application; subject to the agreed conditions with South Wales Police and Environmental Health / Pollution Control; and the additional condition that the terminal hour for late night refreshment on Sundays be reduced from 1am to 12am.
Vale of Glamorgan, Licensing: Public Protection Committee,
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, all the committee papers, the statutory guidance made under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, the council’s own Statement of Licensing Policy and oral representations made on behalf of the applicant, by ward members and by local residents, GRANTED the application subject to the agreed conditions with Pollution Control; and the additional conditions that any events must have the approval of the Highways Authority; and that the licence can only be used for six events per year.