Agenda item

Mr Zohaib Hassan

The Licensing Officer introduced the report regarding an application for a Hackney Carriage driver’s licence. He explained that Mr Hassan had passed all the necessary tests to become a driver, however, he had been brought before the sub-committee due to the fact he had 6 penalty points on his DVLA driver’s licence. He informed Members that under the Council’s licensing policy a driver’s licence must be free of convictions and endorsements for at least one year when the application is made. The offence whereby Mr Hassan had received the 6 penalty points had occurred on 1^st May 2017.

The Licensing Officer explained that in light of this, the sub-committee could either:

·           Grant Mr Hassan a Hackney carriage driver’s licence because the sub-committee considers him to be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence; or

·           Refuse the Hackney carriage driver’s licence because the sub-committee does not consider him to be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

When questioned, the Licensing Officer informed the sub-committee that the Council’s Licensing policy had been made on 15^th July 2014. One Member noted that at the time the policy was made the punishment for using a mobile phone was 3 penalty points and as such would be considered a minor traffic offence. The Licensing Officer also confirmed that all 6 penalty points had been received at the same time and for the same offence.

Mr Hassan proceeded to give his account of the incident in question.  He stated that:

·           He had been driving with his grey glasses case to the side of him which the police had mistaken for a mobile phone and subsequently stopped him.

·           He had to provide a written statement and was advised he would have to go to court.

·           When he spoke with friends they encouraged him to hire a solicitor. However, he explained that if he were to lose the case he would be unable to pay the court fees and so had accepted the offence.

·           Mr Hassan stated that he had applied for a private hire licence in Tewkesbury which he had been granted, despite the fact he had declared his points. He confirmed he had obtained the licence from Tewkesbury in July 2017.

·           He informed the sub-committee that he had passed the medical and other tests as required.

The Legal Officer confirmed that it was possible for Mr Hassan to be licensed in two different boroughs.

The sub-committee proceeded to ask Mr Hassan a series of questions. The Chair queried whether Mr Hassan had read the Council’s licensing policy, he also questioned why they should make an exception for Mr Hassan and vary the policy which clearly states a driver’s licence must be free of convictions for at least one year when the application is made. Mr Hassan reiterated that he had filled out all the necessary forms and passed the medical but he was unaware of the Council’s policy on convictions. He explained that the Licensing team had not made him aware of the policy and it had only been mentioned to him following the completion of the knowledge test. Following questioning, Mr Hassan confirmed that he only required the glasses when he was watching TV and not whilst driving.

The Chair reminded Members that the onus was on Mr Hassan to prove that he was fit and proper to hold such a licence and if they were minded to vary from the licensing policy then they must have clear reasoning for doing so.

The Members then moved to vote on section 1.4.1 to: grant Mr Hassan a Hackney Carriage driver’s licence because the sub-committee considers him to be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

The sub-committee voted unanimously against section 1.4.1.

Resolved that

The sub-committee refuse Mr Hassan’s licence application because the sub-committee does not consider him to be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.

The Chair reminded Mr Hassan that they were refusing his licence application at present, however, he would be free to reapply in the future. Members questioned whether the case would still come before the licensing sub-committee if it had been 12 months since the date of the offence. The Licensing Officer explained that the case would likely come back before the sub-committee as it is considered a major offence and so careful consideration would need to be given to it. Members were encouraged to be mindful of section 3.4 of the report which states “an isolated conviction, without disqualification, for an offence such as dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention, will require careful consideration of the facts and will at the very least merit a warning as to future driving and advice on the standard expected of Hackney Carriage and private hire vehicle drivers”. 

The Chair advised Mr Hassan to read Cheltenham Borough’s Licensing policy and to contact the Licensing Officer should he have any queries. For clarity, he was reminded that he would need to be free from convictions from the day of the offence.

When questioned why he was able to obtain a licence in Tewkesbury but not Cheltenham the Legal Officer explained that each local authority has a different policy and it is Cheltenham’s policy that drivers are free of convictions for 12 months. Mr Hassan also questioned whether the licensing documents he had already submitted would need to be re-submitted. The Licensing Officer advised that the practical driving and English tests would stay on file, however, the medical and criminal record check would need to be redone as this only stay valid for 3 months.