Agenda item

Present (remotely): Applicant and Applicant’s Supporter

The Chairman introduced the Members of the Panel and Officers.

The Legal Advisor outlined the purpose of the hearing and explained the procedure for the meeting.  She reminded the Sub-Committee that the hearing was being conducted remotely via Zoom and must be conducted fairly and reasonably in line with the Applicant’s right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.  In the event of any participant leaving the hearing due to a technical issue, the hearing would not proceed until all parties were present.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report, which related to an application to drive Hackney Carriage or Private Hire Vehicles in North Norfolk where the circumstances merited consideration by the Sub-Committee.

The Applicant’s Supporter presented the case on behalf of the Applicant.  He explained the circumstances in which the Applicant’s offences had occurred.  The Applicant realised the serious consequences that could result from drink driving, had learned her lesson and never wanted to repeat the experience. 

The Chairman explained that the apparent discrepancy between the application form and DBS in respect of the length of driving ban was due to the Applicant having undertaken a drink awareness course, which had reduced the length of the ban, and was not an attempt by the Applicant to mislead the Sub-Committee.

At the request of Cllr J Rest, the Applicant clarified the medication noted on the medical report, the reason it had been prescribed and the current situation regarding it.

Cllr N Lloyd explained that the Sub-Committee had a duty to protect the public and asked the Applicant to provide further information with regard to her current circumstances that might enable the application to be approved.  He asked what impact the drink awareness course had had on her.

The Applicant explained that she was normally a resilient person, but a number of issues had coincided that had pushed her to the edge.  She was now in a much better place, had put the past behind her and wanted to do something good.  She was an experienced driver and considered that taxi driving would be an ideal job.  The drink awareness course had a big impact on her and she did not drink alcohol if she was driving.

The Chairman questioned the Applicant with regard to the details of the drink driving offence. 

The Applicant explained that she had been quite a bit over the limit and had made a huge mistake.  The Applicant’s supporter gave more detail with regard to the circumstances surrounding the offence.

In response to questions from the Licensing Enforcement Officer, the Applicant gave further clarification with regard to her medical report.

In response to questions by the Sub-Committee, the Applicant explained the circumstances of an offence on her DBS that was not related to driving.   She said that in the event of her application being rejected she would still like to be involved in the taxi industry as it involved people and she considered herself to be a sociable person.  She reiterated that she was an experienced driver and considered that driving would be a good line of work for her.

The Chairman invited the Applicant’s Supporter to present his closing statement. 

The Applicant’s Supporter stated that the Applicant had moved forward from the incidents that had occurred and she had been able to deal with subsequent emotional issues without any recurrence.  She had a great deal of driving experience and wanted to return to her usual line of work when the Covid situation allowed.  She had shown that she took drink driving seriously and he considered that she would continue to be a responsible person.  Driving would give her more of a purpose while waiting for her industry to reopen.  She had an offer of work if she gained her licence.

Before the Sub-Committee retired to make its decision, the Licensing Enforcement Officer reminded Members of the need to consider the fit and proper test of whether or not they would allow a family member to travel in a taxi driven by the Applicant.

The Sub-Committee retired at 12.10 pm.

RESOLVED

That the application be refused.