Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Derbyshire and Meerabux. 

Councillor Dhindsa declared a non-pecuniary interest as he had a relative who was a taxi driver; he withdrew from the meeting. 

To submit for signature the minutes of the meeting held on 18 March 2013.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

The minutes of the meeting held on the 18March 2013 were submitted and signed.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services outlining a proposed change to the saloon and estate hackney carriages initial age limit. 

The Licensing Manager introduced the report, and explained the history of the policy.  He advised that members of the trade had asked that the Council consider amending the existing policy so that saloon and estate cars needed to be not more than four years old to be initially licensed, rather than three years old.  This would bring the policy in line with the age limit for London-style cabs and would give drivers greater flexibility as more second-hand cars would be available to them.  The Watford Hackney Carriage Drivers Association (WHCDA) had now formally requested that the policy be for five years rather than four years.

Councillor Turmaine noted that increasing the initial age limit would be welcome; he asked what the reason was for this change.  The Licensing Manager explained that drivers felt that cars which were three years old or newer were quite expensive to purchase; these cars often still had a dealer’s warranty and may not require annual MOTs.  There were more cars on the market which were four years old or more.  The Licensing Manager questioned whether there would be an impact on the quality of the taxi fleet in Watford. 

The Chair commented that if the policy were five years it may be easier for drivers to join or remain in the trade. 

Councillor D. Scudder noted that the initial limit had been three years because of the issue of quality.  He highlighted other issues such as mileage which had an impact on the quality of the vehicle.  He advised that he would be reluctant to change the current policy. 

Councillor Crout questioned whether there would be a significant difference in the cost of purchasing four year-old vehicles and five year-old vehicles. He added that the Council carried out inspections of both the safety and comfort of these vehicles. The Licensing Manager explained how the mechanical and safety inspections were carried out. 

Councillor Turmaine highlighted the limit on the number of licences that were available in the Borough.  The policy, therefore, would have little effect on the number of taxis on the road.  The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head replied that this was the case although a policy of five years would make it easier for drivers to stay in the trade. 

The Vice Chair commented that it was a balance between the initial purchase cost of the vehicle and the perceived quality of the fleet.  The older the initial age of the cars, the older the overall nature of the fleet would be.  He felt that there was a good availability of ex-fleet cars which were approximately four years old.  It seemed sensible to bring the starting age of the saloon and estate vehicles in line with the London-style cabs. 

The Licensing Manager advised the Committee that the wording of the recommendation in the report should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services

The Committee received a report of the Head of Community and Customer Services updating and revising the enforcement policy by:

·              making minor changes to the schedule of contraventions;

·              updating the procedure for revoking licences;

·              introducing a system to suspend licences for short period in certain circumstances.

The Licensing Manager introduced the report and advised that recommendation 2.4 should be amended to read: ‘that officers in consultation with the Chair of the Committee have delegated authority to make further minor amendments to the scheme as necessary. ‘ The Licensing Manager explained that the report was to update the existing policy which allowed penalty points to be given to drivers who contravened byelaws and other rules. The changes proposed were fairly minor and were set out at paragraph 3.14 of the report.  One change to the policy was to reduce the maximum threshold for penalty points in a year from 20 to 15.  The Licensing Manager referred to the table at appendix 1 of the report and explained the proposed changes.  He explained that the proposal was to use the power of suspension of a licence as a sanction. 

In response to a question from Councillor Crout, the Licensing Manager confirmed that the number of complaints had increased and there had been approximately 120 in the last year. 

Councillor Crout referred to recommendations 2.3 and 2.4 in the report and advised that he was concerned about what constituted a significant objection; this was quite subjective in his view.  He asked what approaches had been made to the WHCDA on these proposals.  The Licensing Manager explained that the proposal had come to the Licensing Committee first.  He explained that the recommendations in question were designed to speed up the process, but the policy could be bought back to the Committee if Members wished.  The Chair responded that she would prefer if the policy came back to the Committee as this would be more democratic.  The Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head noted that recommendation 2.2 stated that any amendments would be consulted upon with the Chair.  No decision had yet been made.

The Committee agreed that the policy should come back to a future meeting after consultation. 

Councillor Turmaine referred to the recommended changes to the scale of contraventions in 3.13 and asked who made the decision in these cases.  The Licensing Manger responded that it would be the Licensing Officers and the Licensing Enforcement Officer who would undertake an investigation to see if a contravention had taken place.  Drivers then had the opportunity to challenge the points with the Licensing Manager or the Environmental Health and Licensing Section Head. 

Councillor Turmaine confirmed with the Licensing Manager that any appeal would be heard by a different officer. 

Following a further question from Councillor Turmaine, the Licensing Manager outlined the appeal process for any driver who had reached 15 points. 

Councillor Turmaine referred to the condition relating to the display of signage on a licensed vehicle. He asked whether magnetic signage could be used  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report of the Head of Community and Customer Services

The Committee received a report from the Head of Community and Customer Services asking Members to adopt the revised policy guidelines for the licensed driver conviction policy.  This policy was used when officers considered applications from drivers who had criminal convictions or who were convicted of offences whilst a licence-holder. 

The Licensing Manager stressed that these were only guidelines and individual circumstances could always be taken into account.  Changes had been made to the way that criminal records checks had been carried out and the other key changes were set out on page 22 of the agenda.  The intention was to strengthen the policy where drivers had a violent, sexual, child-related, racially-aggravated or other serious crime on their record. 

Following a question from Councillor Mills the Licensing Manager explained that criminal convictions were generally spent after five years.  Councillor Mills noted that certain convictions never became spent. 

The Licensing Manager referred to the changes with regard to driving offences and that licences could be revoked by the Council if a driver exceeded 12 points on their DVLA licence. 

RESOLVED –

that the revised policy guidelines shown at appendix 2 of the report be adopted.