In either case the conditions must not:. It is still appropriate to note the distinction between spent and unspent convictions when considering an application, and there will be many cases in which a particular spent conviction is no longer relevant because sufficient time has passed to demonstrate a change of character. Sub-committee members should also be mindful that if a person claims to have perverted the course of justice by lying to protect as relative or friend, that in itself may demonstrate a dishonest character.
When making decisions at both the application stage, or in a disciplinary situation with an existing driver, the sole deciding factor should be the safety of the travelling public.
An applicant or licensee should not be given the benefit of doubt. Councils have a broad discretion when refusing to grant a licence, providing the decision is reasonable, proportionate and — ideally — in line with a published policy. If the decision departs from the policy, then the council should state the reasons for this in writing to the applicant.
Where you have refused a licence or granted a licence subject to strict conditions or criteria, or for a shorter period than three years, then you must set out these reasons in writing. However, case law has established that a decision maker dealing with a currently licensed driver should not regard the licence as a piece of property under the Act Cherwell District Council v Anwar In all cases where a licence is suspended or revoked, reasons must be given for that decision.
No decision makers should be permitted to sit on a committee without having been formally trained. As a minimum, training should cover licensing procedures, natural justice, understanding the risks of child sexual exploitation, and disability equality, as well as any additional issues deemed locally appropriate.
It is important that training does NOT simply relate to procedures, but also covers the making of difficult and potentially controversial decisions, and the use of case study material can be helpful to illustrate this. The DfT's statutory standards include suggestions for what should be included in training as a minimum. All training should be formally recorded by the council and require a signature from the councillor.
It should also be remembered that concerns about political lobbying were the basis of the concerns which lead to the first Nolan Committee on Standards in Public Life.
Section 25 of the Localism Act does not prevent members from publicly expressing a view about an issue or giving the appearance of having a closed mind towards an issue on which they are to adjudicate. However, it is recommended that to avoid an appearance of bias the following advice should be observed:. A well-defined policy and comprehensive scheme of delegations to officers can go a long way to avoiding many of these pitfalls, although, of course, members must retain full oversight of how the scheme is working.
We are grateful to Mr de Prez and Local Government Lawyer for their permission to reproduce the points from the article. This is very different to the Licensing Act or Gambling Act , where the presumption is to permit a licence application. This ensures that applications are not heard where the applicant has no legal right to work in the UK and is a requirement of the Immigration Act The service can be contacted at: evidenceandenquiry homeoffice.
HMRC will be publishing guidance for councils on how to undertake these checks as well as information for applicants and licensees outlining how they can demonstrate tax registration. However, character is usually investigated first. Most councils have adopted a formal statement of policy about the relevance of convictions and how this assists in determining whether an applicant is fit and proper.
While each application must be determined on its individual merits, the convictions policy should set out a recommended minimum period free of conviction for offences falling into broad categories as a guideline for licensing committees.
For instance, failure to comply with regulatory requirements may not itself be criminal but may demonstrate a concerning tendency to disregard licence conditions. Factors such as anti-social behaviour, solvency and sobriety may also be relevant. It is important to set out how your sub-committee will view convictions, spent or otherwise, and ideally include it as part of your consolidated taxi licensing policy. Decisions on licensing drivers are exempt from the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and so historic convictions that might otherwise be considered as spent or expired can be taken into consideration.
As set out above, licensing authorities should set out their approach in a convictions policy which should be regularly reviewed and updated as appropriate. In particular, the LGA encourages councils to take a strong stance on indecency offences, such as those relating to sexual assault or rape. While each case must be considered on. Members should be aware of the wide range of criminal offences identified in the Sexual Offences Act that are very strong indicators of risk if an offender were enabled to be alone in a licensed vehicle with a young person or vulnerable adult.
In addition to indecency offences, Parliament also singled out offences of violence and dishonesty as being of particular concern and relevance when issuing licences, and your policy should weight these offences accordingly.
Again, while each case must be considered on its own merits, the IoL guidance sets out a default position whereby an applicant with a conviction for a violent offence or driving offence involving a loss of life will be refused a licence.
The convictions policy should set out expectations for how the licensing authority will remain updated about relevant convictions after the point at which a licence has been granted.
The LGA and DfT statutory standards suggests that all licensing authorities consider making it mandatory for drivers to register for the update service and nominate the licensing authority to be able to check the status of the certificate at any time. Licensees should be able to provide evidence of continuous registration and nomination throughout the duration of their licence. If licensees are obliged under their licence to inform the local authority of their arrest or conviction and they fail to do so or where they fail to notify the police that they hold a licence , this should be viewed particularly seriously as it prevents the local authority from taking that information into account when protecting public safety.
This is also a breach of condition and can be actioned by the authority on that basis. Alternatively, licensing authorities may wish to attach a condition to hackney carriage vehicle licences for the proprietor to notify the licensing authority as soon as they become aware that a driver of the vehicle is arrested, charged, cautioned or convicted of an offence. It is important to remember that your decisions need not, and should not, be based solely on convictions.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that some authorities have been reluctant to attach much weight to non-conviction information, and in some instances have even doubted the propriety of reporting it to members.
However, there is no doubt that this information can and should be considered and may sometimes be the sole basis for a refusal, a suspension or revocation. When dealing with allegations rather than convictions and cautions, a decision maker must not start with any assumptions about them. Allegations will have been disclosed because they.
If, as sometimes happens in practice, admissions are made about the facts, that provides a firm basis for a decision.
It will not be possible to give a comprehensive list of points that will be considered as part of the fit and proper person test, but each council should set out in writing, preferably as part of its licensing statement, an outline of how the council intends to approach these decisions and what factors will carry the most weight.
The licensing history of an applicant is an important factor to consider, and it will always be relevant for an authority to consider a previous refusal or revocation, and the reasons for that decision. Whilst every application must always be considered on its own merits, a previous decision may in many cases warrant significant weight to be given to it. The simple objective of NR3 is to ensure that authorities can take properly informed decisions on whether an applicant is fit and proper, in the knowledge that another authority has previously reached a negative view on the same applicant.
This is an important step to tackling the issue of individuals making applications to different licensing authorities following a refusal or revocation. Previously, if drivers did not disclose information about a previous revocation or refusal of a licence, there was often no way for a council to find this information out. Extensive guidance has been published by the LGA to support licensing authorities with the implementation of NR3. The guidance aims to minimise the work that must be undertaken by individual authorities and provides suggested wording to use to update policies and application forms as well as template letters to send out to licensees.
Guidance can be accessed by logging into the NAFN portal or on request from info local. Whilst over 90 per cent of local authorities are already members of NAFN, those who are not are strongly advised to join in order to make use of NR3. Queries about membership and subscription to NR3 should be directed to general nafn. The LGA hopes that the Government will go further and mandate the use of NR3 as part of the commitment to develop a national licensing database. Taxi and PHV licensing is not an area where there is much scope for self-regulation, but PHV operators do have a key role in ensuring that their drivers are fit and proper persons, that the vehicles they use are adequate and insured, that their staff handle customer information correctly, and that everyone is properly trained in their roles including awareness of child sexual exploitation CSE and disability equality.
Your policy should therefore cover the responsibility of PHV operators for ensuring that their drivers are fit and proper persons. As part of the process of granting and monitoring an operator licence, you may wish to require operators to demonstrate what steps they are taking to ensure that their drivers are fit and proper persons, as well as appropriately trained. This responsibility is even more important now that the Deregulation Act has enabled operators to sub-contract bookings to other providers.
There are existing obligations on operators who seek to pass on a booking and the first operator will always retain overall responsibility for its fulfilment. It is also appropriate to remind operators that they have responsibilities towards their drivers and should ensure that they are not working excessive hours. A case in Mansfield of a driver falling asleep at the wheel and causing a fatality was investigated by the coroner, who recommended greater attention was given to ensuring drivers were not unduly fatigued.
This is most effectively done by the operator, who will have more regular contact with the driver and should be reminding them of the serious consequences that can result if they drive for excessive hours.
These are areas that have not yet been tested through the courts and offers a fertile ground for those innovative councils who wish to make full use of their powers to protect their communities. We encourage councils to explore this, and to share their new practice with the LGA and other licensing authorities.
Changes in technology mean that there are newly emerging operator models, which can require scrutiny to ensure that they comply with the law as it stands. Functions and processes that are well established among non-digital operators may need to be questioned and traced when considering a proposal to operate online.
A checklist of questions to ask is included at the end of this handbook, although the list is not exhaustive. All councils should have a robust system for recording complaints, including analysing trends across the whole system as well as complaints against individual drivers.
Complaints about drivers should be taken seriously and drivers with a number of complaints made against them should be contacted by the council and concerns raised with the driver and operator if. Further action must be determined by the council, which could include no further action, the offer of training, a formal review of the licence or formal enforcement action. The licensing committee should review the complaints procedure and records regularly, and always before a review of the licensing policy.
The committee should have oversight of this to ensure that the council is properly carrying out its enforcement responsibilities. When taxi and PHV drivers contravene conditions of their licence the only sanctions available to members of taxi licensing committees is that of revocation or suspension. For minor infringements, such as not displaying a name badge at all times, revocation or suspension can be too harsh a punishment.
Drivers who make an error in judgement on any given day, with a previous unblemished career, may face all or nothing decisions by councillors if they are reported to committee following a complaint from a member of the public.
Also, once drivers are licensed there is limited information available to continually assess whether they are fit and proper persons, and as such for members to have a clear view of their past conduct when drivers are called to committee for hearings. Rother found that on the whole the trade agreed that the process led to improvements in behaviour, especially by those drivers who tend not to take their role as licensed drivers too seriously.
The trade appreciated that the scheme is transparent and clear, and removes any ambiguity about whether officers or members felt that a matter was serious, or when the driver thought it was very minor.
The penalty points enforcement scheme gives councillors a more influential role in the licensing process, and it allows drivers to understand that members make the decisions on fitness and propriety and not officers. Many other councils have introduced similar schemes and there has been a noticeable improvement in both standards of behaviour and standards of compliance.
Councils should have regard to case law that has established parameters for these schemes, including a judgement in Singh v Cardiff that the scheme must not fetter the discretion of the decision maker. Public scrutiny is an essential part of ensuring that government remains effective and accountable, and this is especially true of quasi-judicial systems like taxi and PHV licensing.
Scrutiny ensures that executives and committees are held accountable for their decisions, that their decision-making process is clear and accessible to the public and that there are opportunities for the public and their representatives to influence and improve public policy. There are a number of aspects of taxi and PHV licensing that are suitable for a scrutiny investigation, ranging from a review of the policy and framework, including how it contributes to a wider transport policy, its success in delivering accessible transport for disabled users, or the handling of complaints; to more specialist subjects such as the setting of fees, provision of taxi ranks, or the age and maintenance of the fleet.
The Centre for Public Scrutiny provides guidance on how to hold effective scrutiny and has a number of case studies from councils that have already held scrutiny enquiries into their taxi and PHV licensing systems. Effective partnership working between local licensing authorities, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency DVSA , police, other council services such as trading standards and environmental health, as well as the local trade, is vital to ensuring effective taxi and PHV regulation. It is particularly important to join up enforcement operations with the police as taxi licensing officers do not have powers to stop and search vehicles.
Similarly, licensing officers may only take action against drivers and vehicles that they have licensed, which is why the issue of cross-border usage is so problematic. You should ensure your council taxi licensing officers meet regularly with their local police force and develop good relationships.
As a councillor, you are well placed to shape and influence how this crucial partnership relationship between your council and other bodies works and develops. There are many areas across England and Wales where these partnerships are working well. It is particularly important to have effective intelligence sharing protocols in place with the local police force.
The police have powers to disclose information under common law, which enables them to share information about relevant investigations with licensing teams even before an arrest or conviction is made. CLPD allows the police to pass information to licensing authorities where a public protection risk has been identified known as a pressing social need , enabling councils to act swiftly to mitigate any danger posed by that individual. Information is shared at arrest or charge, rather than on conviction which may be some time after initial arrest, allowing authorities to take immediate action to revoke a licence.
Unlike NOS there is no presumption that information will be shared; the police are required to justify these disclosures on a case by case basis and will look at the relevance and proportionality of disclosing certain information which is the same test applied to making a disclosure of non-conviction information on an Enhanced Disclosure Certificate.
From November changes to legislation have meant that the Disclosure and Barring Service DBS now filter more conviction information than they did previously which means that less information may be disclosed on an Enhanced Disclosure Certificate. The changes can be summed up as follows:. Authorities should use their local relationships to ensure effective and efficient sharing of intelligence through the appropriate legal gateways. Licences are issued by the local authority for a wide variety of purposes.
For example, a licence is required to drive either a licensed hackney or a private hire vehicle a dual licence allows a driver to drive a hackney carriage vehicle or private hire vehicle and all PHV drivers must work for a licensed private hire operator. When a licence is refused, suspended or revoked by the licensing authority or there are any other concerns raised which may be considered a safeguarding issue, it has been agreed that the licensing authority will notify the police for intelligence purposes.
Without effective information sharing, there is a real risk of unsuitable people being granted licences to operate which puts people at risk. The referral template should also be used to report any safeguarding concerns about any licence holder. The police will create an intelligence report which becomes disclosable as part of any subsequent DBS check undertaken anywhere in the country, thereby reducing the risk of unsuitable persons being granted a licence.
Physical — Including hitting, slapping, pushing, kicking, restraint or inappropriate sanctions. Sexual — Including rape and sexual assault or sexual acts to which the vulnerable person including any young person has not consented, could not consent, or was pressured into consenting.
Psychological — Including emotional abuse, threats of harm or abandonment, deprivation of contact, humiliation, blaming, controlling, intimidation, coercion, harassment, verbal abuse, isolation or withdrawal from services or supportive networks.
Financial — Including theft, fraud, exploitation, pressure in connection with wills, property or inheritance or financial transactions, the misuse or misappropriation of property, possessions, or benefits.
Institutional abuse — This can sometimes happen in residential homes, nursing homes or hospitals when people are mistreated because of poor or inadequate care, neglect and poor practice that affects the whole of that service. The school run checks were followed up with detailed safety inspections that resulted in one notice and a number of warnings:. During the day, Gwent Police traffic officers gave out 16 fixed penalties for no seatbelts, two fixed penalties for using mobile telephones while driving and ordered repairs for a cracked windscreen.
Our regular check-ups are important. Cross border hiring is a term to describe when a taxi is lawfully used for PHV purposes in a district outside which it has been licensed to operate. This is legal, provided either that the driver, vehicle, and operator are all licensed by the first district; or that the operator sub-contracts the booking to an operator licensed in another council area. This practice has become increasingly commonplace with the growth of app-based operator models. This is also problematic, because when a taxi is being driven for PHV purposes in another district, the local council has no powers to intervene if the driver contravenes any condition of the licence or provides a poor service to the passenger; all that can be done is to write to the authority that issued the licence, where this is known.
This practice is also unfair on the trade in the local area, as they may face competition from drivers who may have paid cheaper licence fees or undergone less rigorous checks elsewhere. These safeguards are rarely visible to consumers, who therefore cannot make an informed decision to use the more heavily checked and therefore safer, albeit more expensive, option.
Ultimately this issue will not be resolved until the Government brings in changes to legislation and give councils powers to enforce against drivers and vehicles operating in their areas. However, a s a councillor you have an important role to play to ensure that your local authority is not having a detrimental impact on other authorities and their communities.
One option that is available to support enforcement action against licensees from outside their area is joint authorisation of officers from other authorities. This allows councils to authorise officers from other councils to use enforcement powers on their behalf and subsequently allows those councils to then take action against vehicles which are licensed by the other authority when they cross over council boundaries.
This practice has been recommended in the statutory standards. The LGA has developed a draft protocol below which is suggested as an easy way forward for those authorities wishing to consider such joint authorisations of officers. As set out in the fit and proper person section above, protecting all passengers lies at the heart of taxi and PHV licensing systems. However, recent cases have shown that licensing authorities must ensure that their licensing regimes effectively protect some of their most vulnerable residents, including children at risk of sexual exploitation.
Sadly, both licensed premises and licensed vehicles have been used as opportunities to sexually exploit children, as recent high-profile cases have underlined. The Government commissioned Dame Louise Casey CB to investigate reports into the governance of Rotherham Council following widespread allegations of child sexual exploitation.
Her subsequent review contained two chapters on the role that licensing could and should have played in preventing some of this exploitation, and the report is essential reading for any councillor joining a licensing committee. The full report and documents relating to the Rotherham investigation can be found on on the Rotherham Council website.
Explore the topic Transport and driving businesses Taxis, tractors and specialist vehicles. Is this page useful? Maybe Yes this page is useful No this page is not useful. Thank you for your feedback. Report a problem with this page. What were you doing? What went wrong? Email address. Both licences must be issued by the same council. A private hire vehicle must receive its work from a licensed operator from the same council.
Work started 28 June and is expected to last for several months. Please expect delays during this time and plan your journeys as appropriate. For information on the scheme visit HCC's transport scheme webpage. This means you may be fined if you use a bus lane in Southampton. For information please visit SCC's bus lane changes webpage.
Please direct any queries to SCC.
0コメント