Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.

This report seeks that the committee adopt the new Guidelines from 1^st October 2016 to progress the working group’s recommendations.

The Committee received the report of the Head of Community and Customer Services.  The Business Compliance Officer introduced the report.  He summarised the existing guidelines, explained the rationale for change, outlined the key changes and discussed the driver consultation process.

In response to questions from members, the Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head and Business Compliance Officer:

·        Clarified that a driver being abusive to other motorists would result in an investigation by the Licensing Authority.  Such circumstances may amount to an offence under Sections Four or Five of the Public Order Act and would fall within the policy; potentially resulting in a five year ban.  If convicted of an affray the ban would be for ten years.

·        Advised that the policy applied to all applicants – both for new applicants and to those who re-applied.  It was explained how old criminal convictions would be dealt with in the application process.

·        Informed the committee that, in respect of applicants living abroad, checks on suitability would be made through a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check carried out by the police.  Also, an applicant could obtain a Certificate of Good Conduct from their embassy.

·        Advised that it was a condition of a licence that the holder notified the Licensing Authority of any conviction within 28 days.  Furthermore, under common law, police could notify the authority of the conviction.  If a driver did not inform the authority this could lead to a revocation of the licence.

·        Clarified that the Licensing Authority did not have access to the update service as this was private – it was a matter for a driver to give permission to allow access.  However, only one driver had signed up to the scheme thus far.  The process for the passing of information from the DBS was explained and the committee was informed that drivers were encouraged to be open.

·        Advised the committee that the driver training did not specifically include guidance on how to handle a disabled person - rather drivers should ask what the person needed in the first instance.  The training covered safeguarding issues.

·        Informed the committee that applicants paid a £97 fee for a licence.

·        Explained how the severity of a sentence had an impact on the length of a ban and clarified that the determination of whether an applicant was ‘fit and proper’ to hold a licence predominantly related to convictions.  However, circumstances where a person had been arrested on many occasions but not charged could also be taken in to account.

Members asked why a number of drivers were objecting to some aspects of the convictions policy.  The Business Compliance Officer explained that on occasion drivers could be the victim of crime and feared being involved in an incident resulting in a conviction.  Drivers worked alone and did not know who their passengers were - adding to the risks.  He clarified that the Licensing Authority would look carefully in to such circumstances and there would be flexibility if a conviction had resulted from self-defence for example. 

The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head explained that it was legitimate to take account of patterns of behaviour – this, an audit recommendation; hence why it was put in the policy.  She clarified that the document was longer than the previous draft to ensure it was as clear as possible to drivers.  She explained issues in relation to the criminal justice system that could impact on the holding of a licence. 

In response to further questions from members, the Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head and Business Compliance Officer:

·        Informed the committee that the response to the driver consultation was improved as compared to previous consultations.  Furthermore, there had been a good attendance at the child sexual exploitation training with 140 drivers taking part.  The Chair added that driver’s association representatives put views forward at meetings.

·        Clarified that a driver’s previous history would not be taken in to account when conducting investigations so as not to prejudice the inquiry.

·        Advised that a conviction and caution were, in principle, treated in the same way in terms of a ban – however, there was flexibility.  An example of a recent case of causing actual bodily harm that resulted in a less than five year ban was provided to demonstrate how this flexibility operated in practice.

·        Outlined how the investigation process operated and how investigations were ratified by differing levels of the Licensing Authority management having regard to the nature of an investigation.  

RESOLVED that –

the committee adopts the new guidelines from 1^st October 2016 to progress the working group’s recommendations.