Interactive webcast player

Licensing (Public Protection) Committee
Tuesday, 11th August 2026 at 6:30pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Heather Wallace
  2. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  3. Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities
  4. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  5. Angela Mills
  6. Alice Williams - Democratic Services Officer
  7. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
  1. Alice Williams - Democratic Services Officer
  2. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP
  2. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
  1. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  2. Cllr Heather Wallace
  3. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  4. Cllr Heather Wallace
  5. Cllr Matthew Hind
  6. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  7. Cllr Matthew Hind
  8. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  9. Cllr Matthew Hind
  10. Cllr Heather Wallace
  11. Cllr Michael Collins
  12. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  13. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Maz Hussain
  2. Cllr Heather Wallace
  3. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  4. Cllr Heather Wallace
  5. Cllr Matthew Hind
  6. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  7. Cllr Matthew Hind
  8. Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities
  9. Cllr Heather Wallace
  10. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  11. Cllr Heather Wallace
  12. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  13. Cllr Heather Wallace
  14. Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP
  15. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  16. Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP
  17. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  18. Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP
  19. Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities
  20. Cllr Heather Wallace
  21. Cllr Michael Collins
  22. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  23. Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities
  24. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  25. Cllr Phil Gomm
  26. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  27. Cllr Phil Gomm
  28. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  29. Cllr Phil Gomm
  30. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  31. Cllr Phil Gomm
  32. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  33. Cllr Phil Gomm
  34. Cllr Heather Wallace
  35. Cllr Maz Hussain
  36. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  37. Cllr Maz Hussain
  38. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  39. Cllr Maz Hussain
  40. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  41. Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities
  42. Cllr Heather Wallace
  43. Cllr Michael Collins
  44. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  45. Cllr Majid Hussain
  46. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  47. Cllr Heather Wallace
  48. Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP
  49. Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer
  50. Cllr Heather Wallace
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:00:00
Councillor Liffey -Chalmond.
Lovely, thank you very much.
Okay, so good evening councillors, ladies and gentlemen,
and welcome to this meeting
of the Buckinghamshire Council's Licencing
Public Protection Committee.
I'm Councillor Heather Wallace,
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:00:13
and I'm the chairman of this committee.
So just a bit of housekeeping as normal,
please turn off your mobile phones
and keep on silent during the meeting.
Please raise your hand at the appropriate time
if you wish to speak.
Please remember to turn your microphones on before
and off after you speak.
If there is a fire alarm we exit through the double doors and go in and stand in the car
park.
Thank you.
Right.
We are going to get the officers to introduce themselves starting on my left.
Good evening, Councillors.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:00:43
Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities - 0:00:44
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:00:46
Lindsay ballast, service director for transport and regulatory services.
Good evening, Councillors.
Simon Gallacher, principal licencing officer.
Good evening, Councillors.
Angela Mills - 0:00:58
Alice Williams - Democratic Services Officer - 0:01:01
Angela Mills legal officer to the committee. Good evening I'm Alice Williams
I'm the clerk for this committee.

1 Apologies for Absence

Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:01:06
Alice Williams - Democratic Services Officer - 0:01:14
Thank you chairman so I've received apologies from councillors Paul Kelly
Chirag Chotai Cameron Anderson and Dean Fields and councillor Mike Collins is
substituting for Dean Field.

2 Appointment of Vice-Chairman

Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:01:26
Thank you very much.
Right, item number two, appointment for Vice Chairman.
I'm pleased to appoint Phil Gom as my Vice Chairman for the Licencing Public Protection Committee.
Also, as you may be aware, the Licencing Premises Committee is a separate committee,
So we're going to pause the agenda here and deviate to the appointment of the vice chairman for the premises committee
And I'm also appointing the same council Phil Gomme to be the vice chairman for licencing premises committee
Okay. Thank you very much

3 Declarations of Interest

Item number three declarations of interest. Has anyone got any interest they need to declare?
Yes, sorry, just remembered Councillor Gibbons said she had to leave as she had another appointment
to do for this evening.
Minutes of the previous meeting.

4 Minutes of the previous meeting

Are the members happy to agree the minutes of the licencing public protection meetings
held on the 19th of March, 2026 and the 20th of May, 2026?
And are you happy to agree the minutes of the licencing premises meetings held on the 21st of April and the 20th of May 2026?
Agreed.
General, Reverend Hussein, what's that?
Hello.
Yeah, I just want to say that because I've got to leave at half past six please. No, half past seven I mean.
OK, lovely. Thank you very much.

5 Street Trading Consent Fees

Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP - 0:03:05
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:03:07
Right, okay that's done. So item number five, street trading consent fees. We have a report
which Simon Gallagher is going to present. Thank you Chairman and good evening councillors.
This report asks the committee to approve a new harmonised fee structure for street
trading consents across Buckinghamshire to take effect from 1st of October 2026. The
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:03:34
The proposed fees support the introduction of the Council's new countywide street trading regime
and are based on the principle of cost recovery.
In simple terms, the fees have been calculated to recover the reasonable cost of administering,
monitoring and enforcing the regime, but not to generate a profit for the Council.
The proposals also reflect efficiencies gained from moving to a single countywide approach
and introducing more streamlined processes.
All income and expenditure will continue to be monitored to ensure the fees remain proportionate and represent value for money.
So members will recall that full council was resolved back in April to replace the different street trading arrangements
inherited from the former district councils with a single county wide street trading designation.
So from the 1st of October this year, all streets within Buckinghamshire will become consent streets for the purposes of street trading.
and this will create a consistent approach across the county.
This committee previously approved the revised street trading policy in principle back in
July 2025 and following the full council's decision earlier this year, that policy will
now be implemented from 1st October 2026 and will provide the framework for how street
trading is regulated across the county.
I'll just take this opportunity to remind members of a couple of important points.
Firstly, although the legislation gives a broad definition of a street, the Council's
controls will generally be focused on trading taking place on Council maintained highways
only.
And secondly, community focused events taking place on the highway will generally be treated
as outside the scope of the policy.
The attention is that the regime focuses on commercial street trading rather than community
events and local events.
The new arrangements will also mean that some areas of Buckinghamshire which were not previously
regulated for street trading will now be within scope.
This includes some forms of mobile trading such as ice cream vans.
Conversely, previously prohibited areas may also, may now potentially fall within scope.
When setting fees, the council must ensure they are reasonable and based on the cost
of running the service.
National guidance from the local government association supports a cost recovery approach
and it makes clear that licence fees should be transparent, proportionate and based on
the actual costs of administering and enforcing the licence regime.
The Council cannot use these fees to make a profit or discourage particular businesses from operating.
The report also refers to several court cases which support those principles and confirm
that licencing fees must reflect the reasonable cost of operating the scheme.
These costs can include application processing, inspections, compliance work, enforcement
activity, policy reviews, administration, governance and other related activities such
as feed setting.
The fees currently charged across Buckinghamshire for street trading are based on a variety
of historic arrangements inherited from the former district councils and those arrangements
use different charging methods and these have not been comprehensively
reviewed since the creation of Buckinghamshire Council. The introduction
of the new county -wide regime provides an opportunity to modernise and harmonise
those arrangements into a single transparent fee structure. The proposed
fees have been calculated using a cost recovery model. Officers have undertaken
a detailed assessment of the activities required to administer the street
trading regime, including application processing, dealing with inquiries, compliance, monitoring,
inspections, complaint investigation, enforcement activity, policy maintenance and fee review.
The largest cost is officer time and those costs have been combined with the appropriate
overheads and support costs to produce a fee structure that is proportionate and transparent.
As this is the first comprehensive review under the new county -wide regime, officers
will carefully monitor income and expenditure and report back to members within the following
financial year. Any significant surplus or deficit will be taken into account when future
fees are reviewed. The proposed fees have been split into two
elements. The first element is an application fee which covers the work involved in processing
and determining an application. The second element is a maintenance fee which covers
the ongoing costs of monitoring, administering and enforcing the regime once a consent has
been granted. The proposed structure also includes reduced fees in some circumstances
where lower levels of administration are expected, for example where a trader has additional
trading sites, additional vehicles or where traders operate for less than 20 hours a week.
Members will find the proposed fee schedule at appendix 1 of the report. The current number
of licenced traders operating within Buckinghamshire Council is approximately 19 and based on intelligence
and existing records, we estimate that this could rise to around 40 traders under the new regime.
Although the exact numbers remain uncertain at this stage,
projected income is expected to broadly maintain existing income levels into the service.
Importantly, the efficiencies created by introducing the county -wide policy
and streamlined administration have allowed the proposed fees to be set significantly lower
than those currently paid by many existing traders.
As I've mentioned, officers will monitor the operation of the scheme closely and report back to committee within 12 months of implementation should these new proposed fees be agreed.
Benchmarking has been undertaken against 10 neighbouring authorities as shown in Appendix 2.
And the average fee for a new application from our neighbouring authorities was found to be approximately £2 ,000.
and the average renewal fee approximately £1 ,750.
Buckinghamshire's proposed fees of £1 ,668 for a new application
and £1 ,458 for renewal sits below the average charged
by the neighbouring authorities whilst obviously still supporting a cost
recovery approach.
In terms of other options considered, the alternative would be
to retain the existing fee arrangements.
Officers do not recommend this approach
because those arrangements are based on historic district
council fee structures and not aligned
to the new county -wide policy approach
and do not accurately reflect the anticipated cost associated
with the new regime.
The report at 4 .1 to 4 .5 sets out
the legal and financial implications,
essentially reiterate the comments I've made.
In terms of corporate implications,
The proposal supports several of the Council's wider corporate objectives.
The Street Trading Regime contributes to protecting vulnerable people and public health through appropriate assessment and regulation of trading activities.
It also supports environmental objectives by allowing sustainability and environmental impacts to be taken into account when considering applications.
The proposed fees will ensure that the regime is properly resourced while the move to a
single county -wide approach and more efficient processing provides value for money.
The Quality Impact Assessment undertaken as part of the Policy Review identified no negative
impacts on protected groups.
If approved, it is intended that the fee changes will be communicated to current and prospective
new consent holders ahead of implementation from October.
It is intended that existing consent holders have the option of retaining existing consents
until they are expiry, at which point they will be required to apply to renew under the
new arrangements, or alternatively they may submit an early renewal and make an earlier
transition to the new regime.
The recommendation then is to approve the proposed street trading consent fees set out
in appendix 1 to be applied from 1 October 2026.
That concludes my report.
Thank you Chairman, I am happy to take any questions.
Lovely, thank you very much for that report.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:11:37
So we are open to questions and I've got one for Chairman.
I'm going to jump in and then Councillor Hind.
So what are we doing to make sure that we are as possible?
I've noticed there's three that are much higher than us,
three roughly similar, but also five much lower in your Chartered Appendix on Patienthood 29.
Yes, thank you Chairman.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:12:02
So the benchmarking information is included there as an informative.
It's also quite apparent that there is quite a wide discrepancy between different authorities.
I don't know why that is.
What I can say is that the fees that we've proposed, we spent a lot of time analysing
the anticipated work involved to ensure that they meet the costs of running the service
whilst keeping them to a minimal.
And as I said, the intention is to come back
within the next financial year.
And if we, you know, with any new sort of
fee structure setting,
there is an element of estimation and guesswork.
Our obligations legally are to estimate the fees
as accurately as we can.
We're not obliged to get them spot on.
We know that that's not necessarily gonna happen,
but any surpluses or deficits will be reported back
and we'll, if necessary, suggest revised fee structures.
Great, so basically in the next review we can see if it's too much, too little, or we are breaking even.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:13:08
And just to let everyone know, we have to be completely cost neutral, so we've got to get this right.
Okay, thank you. Councillor Hines.
Simon, it's quite a big jump from 19 to 40.
I know you say it's based on analysis.
Cllr Matthew Hind - 0:13:23
Is the reason it's 19 at the moment because of the fees we charge?
Does that put people off, do you think?
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:13:33
It's more to do with how the current arrangements are in place.
As I said, we've sort of inherited the previous arrangements from the previous
districts and the way historically street trading was approached was different in
the different areas. So for example, Ellesbury Vale area, we only had, we had controls in
the Ellesbury town centre and the Buckingham town centre, but outside of those areas, generally
street trading was unregulated. In Wickham, all, I think all areas were consent areas,
which street trading was required. And then in the sort of Chiltern South Bucks areas,
it was a little bit of a mismatch. So what we've done with the new approach is it's a
level playing field for everyone.
Cllr Matthew Hind - 0:14:24
So people who weren't previously having to now, will now have to pay, is that right?
That's correct, yes.
Okay, fair enough, that explains a bit.
Secondly, I can understand the comparisons with a lot of the other local counties, but
including Windsor seems to have, because we know Windsor is full of thousands of Americans
who are willing to pay all sorts of money for all sorts of things.
So you get the feeling that Windsor can charge almost what they like
for their street trading.
You know, certainly our screen vans at the current time are, I guess,
licenced to print money.
So I just wonder whether including Windsor may have just skewed the average somewhat,
and perhaps you might consider, you know, excluding ones that aren't really comparable with what we have in Bucks.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:15:15
We put it in purely for, you know, we usually do that with our fee structure,
putting the benchmark from our neighbouring authorities.
And it's there really just as a little sense cheque.
I think the important thing is that we calculate the fees correctly
to cover what we anticipate to be the costs.
I don't know how the other authorities have set their fees.
We haven't, we didn't drill into that.
and as I say in some respects perhaps a little bit irrelevant I think the
important point is that we've set fees at the levels that we think are
necessary to cover the costs I think you know I don't think it's appropriate for
me to comment too much on the other other fees oven say I can see that
there is quite a lot of disco discrepancies across the board and how
they've calculated them I don't know but what I can say is from a legal
perspective you know there are hard and fast rules if you like about setting
fees and they should be set at a cost recovery basis and not not on the basis
of what you think people might pay because it's more you know in a more
affluent area or not. It just then seems a bit unsurprising that Windsor should
Cllr Matthew Hind - 0:16:25
charge as much as they do because I guess they feel they they can do it.
then we're not here to talk about it.
No, they aren't.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:16:34
So we are here to talk about whether we remain cost neutral,
which is the absolute ideal.
Council Collins.
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Michael Collins - 0:16:42
From a standpoint of pure ignorance,
can you please distinguish, for my benefit,
the difference between a market trader and a street trader?
We are fortunate that we have markets around the county.
Are they within the street trading category,
or is there a separate category for market traders?
So, yeah, that's a good question.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:17:07
So, there is a specific exemption
within the street trading legislation for markets.
So, established markets sit outside of this regime.
They have their own arrangements essentially.
Anyone else got any questions?
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:17:32
We feel we have had an opportunity to discuss this.
I will read the recommendation.
To approve the proposed street trading consent fees set out in appendix one to be applied
from the first of October 2026.
Proposer seconder?
Thank you very much.
Okay so we'll do a vote by hands for the motion.
So that's no against and no abstentions. Lovely. Thank you very much for that.

6 Hackney carriage and private hire licensing enforcement update

Okay so we're going to go on to item number six which is the Hackney carriage and private
hire licencing enforcement update.
This declares I do compliance on the taxi.
right okay so does he need to leave or can he remain and not vote?
Do you want to explain your declaration of interest?
Cllr Maz Hussain - 0:18:37
I do compliance and MRTs on taxis, hackneys and private tyres.
It doesn't affect the licencing so it's just the declaring.
Yeah, is that okay?
Yep, that's fine. Good.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:18:56
It's always best to double cheque these things. Yeah, that's fine, that's noted. Thank you.
Okay, right. So, as I said, we have Hackney Carriage and Private High Licencing Enforcement update.
and Simon, you're going to give the report over to you Simon.
Thank you Chairman.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:19:14
This report provides the Committee with its regular update on Hackney Carriage and Private Hire licencing activity enforcement.
The report covers the six month period from the 1st of October 2025 through to the 31st of March this year.
It brings together information about the licence trade, applications and decisions, complaints, enforcement action,
appeals and wider developments affecting tax in private hire licencing. The
recommendation is that the committee notes the contents of the report. There
are no policy or financial decisions required from members this evening.
Turning first to the overall size of the local licence trade, paragraph 2 .1
compares the position with the equivalent sixth month period in the
previous year. It's noted that the number of licenced drivers has remained
relatively stable, reducing by just under 2 % to 3 ,427.
The number of licenced vehicles reduced by around 4 % to 2 ,450.
By contrast, the number of licenced private hire operators
has increased by around 5 % to 221.
The important point, I think, with these figures
is that they do not suggest a significant change
in the size of the local licence trade.
Driver numbers remain broadly stable, although there has been a modest reduction in the number of licenced vehicles and an increase in the number of licenced private hire operators.
Paragraph 2 .2 provides an update on wheelchair accessible vehicles or WAVs.
As of 31st March this year the Council licenced 314 WAVs.
Of these, 109 were Hackney carriages and 205 were private hire vehicles.
And this represents an increase of around 8 % when compared with the equivalent period
in the previous year, where there were 290 WAVs.
However, the figure is 2 .5 % lower than the 322 recorded WAVs in the immediate preceding
reporting period, which is basically the end of September last year.
It's also worth noting that whilst not referenced in the report, while there has been some fluctuation
in the number of licenced WAVs.
The number of Hackney carriage WAVs
has remained broadly static,
and the fluctuations tend to reflect
provision of WAVs within the private hire trade.
Paragraphs 2 .4 to 2 .6 place the overall
local licencing figures in the wider context.
What we see nationally is growth has principally
been in the private hire activity,
while traditional Hackney carriage numbers have reduced.
Looking at licence applications and their outcomes,
paragraph 2 .7 references the overall numbers of applications received,
and the charts at paragraph 2 .8 show the breakdown between new and renewal applications
and the differences between the different licence types.
2 .9 highlights three main observations.
First, renewals accounted for approximately 64 % of application activity.
Therefore, the services workload is significantly driven by maintaining and reviewing the existing
licenced trade rather than new entrants to Buckinghamshire Council's licencing regime.
Secondly, private hire licencing accounted for approximately 78 % of transactions across
the different licence types.
Thirdly, vehicle licencing generated approximately 65 % of application activity.
This is largely because vehicle licences are issued annually,
whereas driver licences are issued for three years and operator licences for five years.
Paragraphs 2 .10 and 11 show the monthly application profiles,
with October and March being the busiest months.
Paragraph 2 .12 provides breakdown of overall driver licence applications received,
shows 80 % of applications received from drivers
were from those renewing their licence.
Looking at licences granted,
of 88 % of all applications received resulted in a licence being granted.
The table at paragraph 2 .14 provides a breakdown of the 1 ,800 -odd licences granted,
of which just over 1200 of those were for renewals, again reiterating the observation
that established licenced trade continues to make up the majority
of Buckinghamshire Council's licenced trade.
And appendix one provides the full month by month breakdown with numbers
of applications refused, rejected and withdrawn.
Looking at vehicle licencing, only one vehicle licence application was refused.
That was in relation to a vehicle that had been identified as a category S insurance write -off
and was therefore refused in accordance with the council's policy.
Paragraph 2 .20 reports the average processing time for applications for vehicle licences,
which is around three working days.
And this is well within the council's published
service level agreement of 10 working days.
Just commenting on that, we know that timely processing
is operationally important to the trade
because unnecessary delays can prevent a vehicle
from being licenced and therefore from being used
for licenced work.
The team works hard to ensure applications are processed
with the minimum delays.
I think it also highlights the importance
of the trade of completing and submitting
and complete and valid applications.
Looking at drivers, with the driver licence applications,
we have 569 applications were granted,
which is around just over 80 % of the applications we received.
57 % of our driver applications required referral
to an enforcement officer because there
were potential issues around noncompliance
with policy. Importantly, a referral does not mean that the application will necessarily
be refused, it just means that the case requires an individual assessment rather than straightforward
administrative processing. And officers are obliged to consider the information available,
the policy, public safety implications and the individual circumstances of the case.
Of the driver licences granted, again 66 % related to renewals, which again just demonstrates
that the majority of our applicants are members of the existing trade.
23 drivers refused applications during the period,
this is lower than the 32 refusals recorded in the equivalent period last year.
And the principal reasons for refusal were serious motoring offences, including mobile phone use,
while driving, driving without insurance, speeding, totting up disqualifications,
and driving without due care and attention.
A recurring feature in a number of cases is dishonesty or non -disclosure.
This includes failure to declare convictions, previous refusals, warning, licencing history,
medical changes or police investigations.
Other cases involved wider public safety concerns including violent or drug related offended,
reported inappropriate conduct and general failures to satisfy policy requirements.
Appendix 2 of the report gives members an anonymised summary of the grounds for each refusal.
During the period we also had 63 driver applications that were rejected
because payment was not received within the 24 hour submission window.
The system automatically, as we've discussed before,
the committee automatically refuses,
rejects those applications.
As with the vehicle applications,
the average processing time was three working days.
Again, well within the 10 working day
service level agreement.
Looking at operators, during the period
we received 47 applications for operator licences.
20 of these were granted, 19 were rejected,
and eight were withdrawn.
No operator licence applications were refused.
I think it's also not mentioned in the report,
but worth noting that since the report was compiled, we've,
oh sorry, since the reporting period, so since March,
we've made a number of changes
to the online application procedure for operators,
which provides additional support and guidance.
And as a consequence, we've seen a noticeable improvement
in the number of correct applications being received
first time for operators which represents efficiency gains for both the
trade and the team. Enforcement wise, central function of the licencing team
is to ensure that licenced drivers operators remain fit and proper and the
licenced vehicles remain safe and suitable. Our enforcement work is both
reactive and proactive. Reactive work includes responding to complaints,
incident reports and information supplied by members of the public, the
licenced trade, the police and other public bodies or licencing authorities.
Proactive activity is planned by officers, maybe intelligence -led or
focused on particular risks, locations or activities. So examples include cheques
around schools, major events, vehicle inspections, applying for hour operations
and test purchase operations. In terms of complaints we received 184 complaints
during the reporting period.
The total number of complaint categories shown in the graph,
that's paragraph 2 .30, I think it is, page 37,
shows more complaints than the actual number,
and that's because some complaints
would be for multiple issues.
So a single report might concern both,
for example, driver behaviour and driver standards.
We think that that's valuable for us because the ability to record more than one category
gives us a more accurate picture of the issues involved and
Helps us identify recurring themes
Driver behaviour and conduct remain to the largest sort of largest source of complaint
followed by driving standards and vehicle related matters
Just to mention the other category that's there
should be treated with care.
In most instances it was selected alongside another
complaint category and therefore was not necessarily
a separate or unidentified complaint type.
Of the 184 complaints we received,
55 were concluded without further investigation.
The main reason for that was that either insufficient
information was provided to take the matter forward,
the complainant could not be contacted for further details,
or the issue was outside the licencing authority's powers and did not represent a public safety concern.
The remaining complaint resulted in 129 investigations and outcomes ranged from
advice and written warnings through to penalty points, suspensions, revocations and refusals
of applications. The outcome in each case depends on the seriousness of the matter,
the available evidence and the licencing authority's history,
the relevant policy provisions and whether licence conditions have been breached.
So in terms of sanctions, during the reporting period, officers issued 122 penalty point notices,
123 warning letters, 67 driver suspensions. Just in respect to those 67 suspensions,
the vast majority of those related to medical issues, this is typically where driver experiences
a change in their health condition which means they don't meet the councils group 2, sorry
the group 2 medical standards and in such cases suspension is a protective measure and
this shouldn't be interpreted as a finding of misconduct.
During the period 22 drivers had their licences revoked, it's a slight increase on the 18
drivers revoked in the same period last year.
Appendix 3 in the report provides an anonymised summary of the reasons.
These include serious motoring offences and disqualifications, applying for hire, insurance
offences, repeated poor driving, dishonesty, non -disclosure, safeguarding concerns, medical
concerns and allegations of convictions involving serious offences.
Just by way of a reminder for members that in making our decisions the council may rely
on all relevant information and we're not just restricted to criminal conviction information
and the legal test for officers making those decisions is whether on the balance of probability
they can be satisfied that a driver remains fit to hold a licence.
And if the answer to that question is no we're obliged to take action in respect to the licence.
I think just to highlight as well, although every revocation is significant, to put it
in context, the 22 revocations is well below 1 % of our licenced drivers and the vast majority
of our drivers we know are hardworking and law abiding and don't raise concerns.
In terms of vehicle enforcement, 20 vehicle licences were revoked during the period.
Most of these were where the vehicle had been involved in an accident and had been immediately suspended and not been repaired or demonstrated to be safe and suitable within the legally prescribed period of two months.
Seven vehicle licences were revoked. This was as a result of the associated driver having their licence revoked because they could no longer be considered fit and proper.
Paragraph 2 .42, the report summarises a range of proactive and joint enforcement activity
with various partner agencies which have been carried out during the reporting period.
We had 15 appeal hearings.
Essentially these all related to a single case whereby we had revoked a driver's licence
and that individual was the director of a company that had 15 vehicle licences.
Those licences were either refused or revoked. The individual appealed and the
council successfully defended its decision in revoking and refusing those
licences and the appeal was dismissed and the appellant was ordered to pay the
Council's costs.
Finally in terms of updates, members will recall earlier this year the committee approved
revised Hackney carriage and private hire licencing policy back in March.
The scheduled implementation date of 1 September this year.
As stated at paragraph 2 .46, Council has received a judicial review claim concerning aspects
to the revised policy and is currently defending that claim.
As the matter is subject to live legal proceedings,
it would not be appropriate to discuss the substance
of this claim at this meeting.
Other than to say the court has made no determination,
the policy remains scheduled for implementation
on the 1st of September.
Officers have continued the necessary preparatory work
for the implementation of the policy.
This includes communications with the trade
and other stakeholders, staff training, revised administrative processes, system changes,
procurement when necessary and updating guidance, application material and online information.
Future enforcement reports will monitor the practical impact of the revised policy
requirements and this will help members assess the effects on compliance, workload, enforcement
and other available performance measures.
Paragraph 2 .50 highlights a significant national development.
Last November, the Department of Transport announced proposals
to give the Secretary of State powers
to introduce national minimum standards
for taxing private hire drivers, vehicles and operators.
And those proposals followed recommendations made
in Baroness Casey's review into child sexual exploitation.
The stated objectives are to improve passenger safety, safeguarding and accessibility, and
to address differences in licencing standards between authorities.
The licencing service welcomes the principle of greater national consistency.
Common minimum standards could help reduce the incentive for applicants or businesses
to seek a licence from an authority perceived to having less demanding requirements, commonly
described as licenced area shopping.
The detailed effect on Buckinghamshire Council will depend on the legislation and standards
that are ultimately introduced and any future local policy may need to be revised to align
with those national standards.
Whilst not mentioned in the report, there is also another significant pending development.
The government announced a new draught Tax in Private Hire Bill in the King's Speech.
Whilst we're waiting for further, for the draught content to be published, it's expected
to set out a wide range of reforms including modernising the tax in private hire legislation
which you're probably aware the legislation that regulates Hackney carriages dates back to 1847
and the legislation we use for private hire trade dates back around 50 years so it's well overdue
for reform. Other aspects within the bill are expected to deliver on the
government's commitment to legislate in response to Baroness Casey's national
audit on sexual exploitation including the minimum standards I've just
mentioned. Strong enforcement powers for regulators so swift and enforcement
action can be taken, improve transparency and information sharing nationwide by
mandating use of national databases of all licenced vehicles, drivers and
operators, delivering more accessible services for disabled passengers,
providing a consistent customer experience and supporting the sector by
creating clearer rules to enable fair competition by supporting the wider
economy. So we wait for the details with keen interest and will continue to keep
members updated on developments in this area of new legislation. We've had no
further information from the government on its consultation in relation to
transferring licencing functions to local transport authorities. And just
finally just to mention the alongside the tax and private hire bill the House
of Commons Transport Committee also conducted a major inquiry into taxing private hire licencing,
concluding with its report which was published back in June and it includes a number of recommendations
including higher national minimum standards, the national database, stronger cross -bordering
enforcement powers, mandatory information sharing, consideration of CCTV requirements,
measures to address out of area working and we can see a lot of those recommendations
have been anticipated by the government in the new legislation.
So we'll continue to bring enforcement and performance updates to the committee on a
six monthly basis.
And Chairman that concludes the main report, main point of my report.
The recommendation is that members note the contents of the report.
Happy to take any questions.
Thank you.
Thank you Simon.
Is there any more questions they'd like to ask?
Councillor Hines.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:39:44
Do you capture any information about whether the people who complain are wheelchair users
or not?
Cllr Matthew Hind - 0:39:54
If you had 184 complaints, would you know whether there was a significant proportion
and were wheelchair users or similar?
Yeah that's a good question Councillor. So we've got the... let me just pull it up so
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:40:11
I've lost my report.
Yeah, we'd expect it to be captured within the discrimination aspect category of the
report.
Sometimes those are also reported under the other category or sometimes it might cross
over so quite often what we see is when people complain to us it's a number of different
things.
So it might be, for example, driver conduct.
They may record it under that aspect.
I think he's asking whether we know of the people that can make the complaints, how many of them are wheelchair users? I don't think we do know.
No, sorry, yes, to answer, sorry, yes, I'm a bit answering. To answer the question, I haven't got that information to hand out.
I have a meeting with a group in Chesham,
in my investment wheelchair users.
Cllr Matthew Hind - 0:41:23
A group that came to the meeting last time,
and I don't want to be ambushed by,
we gave 183 complaints over the last six months.
Yeah, so that information would be very useful to have,
I think, if they, just even if it was just to see
if there was a disproportionate number of people complaining
who were wheelchair users.
I think it would be about whether or not in our complaints reporting process people were
Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities - 0:41:52
willing to declare things like gender, disability, et cetera.
So I think it's something for us to take away and have a look at the existing reporting
mechanism and then consider whether or not we are collecting those demographics as part
of that.
And then I think normally that demographic reporting is voluntary so people can choose
to.
Because there could be quite a lot of different demographics
to fit in there.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:42:19
It's quite challenging, because at one of our previous meetings,
we also talked about capturing complaints in relation
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:42:27
to violence against women and girls.
We've been having quite a lot of conversations about that behind
the scenes as well, and how we can best categorise that.
We're kind of looking to align it
with the introduction of the policy,
and whether we introduce new reporting categories.
I'll let you know if they were the bulk of them.
Thank you.
So I've got a question on 2 .30.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:42:51
184 complaints recorded over the period, is that more or less than the same period previously?
In the previous report?
It's actually quite a lot less actually.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:43:06
I think it was about 300 complaints we reported last time.
So it's quite a lot.
So 300 previously, down to 184.
Approximately, I think it was about 300.
Do we know why that's decreased?
Is there any?
I don't know, if I'm honest.
I don't know.
That's good news.
That's good news.
OK, so we've got a few.
We've got Councillor Mabou -Hussain's got a question.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:43:30
Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP - 0:43:34
My question is about the complaint.
I just wonder, was the complaint being received,
or the person saying it's unfairly treated.
What happened next?
Do we have independent team looking at it?
Or is it you just look at it and say,
is it genuine or not genuine, or respond back?
I just wonder what the procedure is being
used to answer the complaint.
So obviously, as you'd expect, all our complaints
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:43:59
are thoroughly investigated.
And I mean, it really just depends on the circumstances.
But it ultimately, you know, the officers will make an assessment and quite often these
complaints are, you know, there's no, the evidence is really around individuals testimony
about what happened and as you can imagine quite often what will happen is the complainant
will say this happened and then we will speak to the driver and the driver will give a different
version of events and so the officers will, you know, they'll build up an assessment and
The things they'll take into account, for example, is previous history,
if there's a pattern, those sorts of things.
So it kind of really depends on the circumstances of this particular case.
And -
I just want to, sorry, I just want to know who makes the decision about the complaint.
Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP - 0:44:53
Is it just officers who wrote right to the person saying he's dealing with
the case if the person thinks it's unfairly treated?
So what next step to be used?
We just say to the test officer go back to him and say well that decision was right or how do we do that?
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:45:14
So yeah complaints what will happen is we have sort of like a triage triage process so complaints will come in
To
Typically through our mailbox with the the online reporting and then it'll be allocated to
One of our enforcement officers who will then make the initial inquiries and then depending on what the outcome of that is
If it is evidence in indication that it might be some form of enforcement sanction needs
to be taken, it will then be escalated to a licencing officer, a more senior officer,
to then make a decision.
What happens in practise is the individual's concern, the driver concern is consulted throughout
that process so they get opportunities to state their case.
So before any decision or final decision is made, the individual will be either...
So what we do is use what we call a minded to approach.
So for example, if there was evidence that somebody, for example, had refused to take
an assistance dog and we would take a statement from the complainant, we would then speak
to the driver concerned they would get their opportunity to put their case forward.
Then a more senior officer then reviews the case they make an assessment and say if it's a case
where they think on balance probabilities I think this this has happened and this person then falls
foul of our policy in terms of discrimination the individual concern will then be told that and they
will get an opportunity to make a final representation and ultimately it's a designated
office of the council that will then make the decision and then if they're agreed by
the decision there is an appeal process through the courts. So does that help?
I just wondered if that will at any stage will come to the committee or go to the chairman
Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP - 0:47:12
for any sort of complaining people to see what you, but it's I understand it's just
internal so you people deal with it and respond accordingly.
Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities - 0:47:25
Yes, so enforcement decisions are delegated to officers within the current constitution
and the delegation framework that sits below that.
What we do as part of working in this manner, if you look at the volume of the work that's
happening in the service, it's significant.
And you need to think about that in terms of sort of the timing of these decisions and
the need to make timely decisions around enforcement activity.
So the report that you've got in front of you tonight is our way of making sure that
the committee have got visibility of the enforcement activity that's happening in the service and
the kind of volumes of activity that are being dealt with and the sort of issues that are
arising that the officers are dealing with on a very regular basis.
As well as the appeals process against a formal sanction through the courts, anybody who thinks
that the council hasn't acted in accordance with policy
and hasn't followed its own procedures has got the
opportunity to use the council's complaints process as well
and ultimately obviously there's an ombudsman process at the end
of that too so that there's several avenues available.
Okay, thank you very much.
Yeah, Councillor Collins.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:48:36
Yeah, thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Michael Collins - 0:48:39
Further to the Chairman's question,
is there a general downward trend
across all complaint categories compared to previous years because if there is across
the board downward trend, it could be indicative of other issues.
And the second question, if I may, is do we undertake unannounced spot cheques on both
vehicles and drivers because as you go around the county you can see a very
often a vehicles and possibly drivers that you wouldn't think would meet the
criteria that we impose. Yeah on the first question I haven't got that
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:49:29
information to hand in terms of whether that sort of downward trend applies
across all categories so I'd have to come back to on that with the detail.
We can look at that as part of the next round of bringing a report through to
Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities - 0:49:43
the committee so it's something that the team would be doing anyway because then
we'll have a longer reporting period as well so we can have a little look at
whether or not we've seen any significant changes. I think we just need
to bear in mind any changes to reporting categories that might influence that but
it's definitely something the officers could have a look at. Because that would be really good if the trade themselves have been helping
to bring down the possibilities of complaints and then they need to be thanked for that.
And you know potentially that feeds into fee review as well doesn't it because you know
if there's less activity because there's less complaints so that's the other part that comes
along with that.
Yes less cost to us so we can reduce.
It's something that we need to look at as we move into fee review which normally happens
we start that work well in the next two to three months and then the committee would
fee review work in front of them normally in February, I think February
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:50:41
March. Yeah so yeah in terms of the unannounced so I sort of glossed over it
in my introduction but the report outlines some of the activities that the
team have carried out. We do a lot of proactive enforcement with partner
agencies, typically with the police, so it's like with the road safety team, that might be
sort of on the ground or in vehicles, pulling over licenced vehicles and doing spot cheques on
the vehicle and the driver. We do a lot of work with our colleagues in the home to school transport
at school pick up and drop -off times. We do work with neighbouring authorities.
So for example we've mentioned work we've done with Transport for London. More recently
we did an operation with colleagues from Bedford which was the first time we've
done that. We work closely with Milton Keynes. We know a lot of our licenced
drivers work in operating in Milton Keynes.
is nothing under that of the county?
No, this would be our enforcement officers going out
with colleagues from other authorities
but also officers will go out on their own.
So our officers will go out and do proactive cheques
at like the taxi ranks, at the night time economy,
that sort of thing.
The other thing we do is events,
so where we know we're going to have a lot of taxis,
so it might be Silverstone or something like that.
We will, our offices will go out and proactively cheque vehicles and drivers.
One of that is unannounced.
Yeah, so that's all, yeah, all proactive unannounced visits.
Okay, thank you.
Right, Councillor Gough.
Thank you very much, Chair.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:52:37
And before I continue, I'd like to say thank you very much for promoting me up to your Vice Chair.
I promise I'd look after you and the committee as best I can on the way.
Simple as that.
Okay, so my couple of questions would be,
I notice the figures have slightly dropped this year compared to last with drivers and cars,
but with the licencing service received 47 applications to private higher operator licences,
20 were granted but 19 are rejected.
could you explain the rejection side of it?
Because that's quite high, 50%, almost of applique.
That's on 2 .27.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:53:19
Yeah, so that, as I say, with the operator applications,
they're probably our most sort of complex applications.
So to obtain a private hire operator's licence,
we request a whole raft of documentation.
and so we did we were saying quite a lot of applications getting getting rejected
and we kind of analysed it and recognised that I think a lot of us a
lot of occasions that was misunderstanding what was required so
as I mentioned although it's not in the report since the reporting period we've
changed our application forms for operators and the office is telling me
we're getting a lot more kind of compliance
with the application requirements,
a lot better quality applications.
So I'm confident that figure will drop significantly
when we report again in six months time.
Thank you.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:54:16
And then to follow on, so thanks for the explanation there.
I'm not sure the public watching in
will understand a bit more.
And then, you know, when I look at these complaints,
so we've had 184 complaints,
when you look percentage wise
over how many drivers we got, 3 ,100.
The percentages is quite low.
No complaint is good, but it's quite low when compared
to percentage wise.
What I'd like to know, there's a couple of things here,
is within those complaints,
are there any repetitive person complaints in there?
So, you know, there's 153,
but that could have been two people.
So, are they individual complaints, do we know,
or am I being a bit pedantic?
Um, so like multiple complainants.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:55:05
Yeah, we, we tell the person because you know,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:55:10
someone could get 10 complaints and it pumps your, your figure up.
Yeah. Yeah. We, it doesn't often happen.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:55:15
We have identified occasionally will notice and think there's a brick, you know,
an email address that's being used for multiple complaints coming in.
Is that what you mean?
Or do you mean about the driver?
The other side, yeah.
No, because that would, what would typically happen
if a driver, for example, is getting multiple complaints,
we, because each time a complaint gets in,
they get recorded against the driver's history.
So if a driver's getting three, four complaints
about their behaviour, that's a red flag for us.
So then we will speak to them and say,
look, you've had this, you've had this complaint.
and it might and then that's where our kind of tiered enforcement comes in to
the first occasion it might be we speak to them and then we get another complaint
and then it's building up a pattern and then it we might use like the points
penalty points written warnings and if we're still getting complaints and then
it's a serious sanction but thankfully I mean that that's that's very rare that
that would happen okay so these are typically going to be different
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:56:24
Okay, I understand that. And then there's no record of, now we flick it the other direction of vindictive complaints.
You know, those that make complaints because they just want to make a complaint.
There's no record of that, that you might get a hundred. You don't get none of those, really?
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:56:45
There are, I mean the report mentions, you know, there's a number of complaints that
weren't basically followed up because there was insufficient details or contact details,
you know, when we tried to contact them back they didn't go anywhere.
So those, you know, you kind of think well is there any merit to this or how, you know,
is it malicious or, you know, but the team is very good and we're alive to that and there's
mentioned and we did have an incident a while ago where we kind of identified
somebody that we felt was making kind of spurious complaints and it got picked up.
That would be my last one. I know I'm just gonna follow Councillor Hine if you don't mind
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:57:25
Chair is you know we had the wheelchair people here last year and they they made
it quite clear that they have complaints of that so it might be nice to try and
find them so we can answer back to them a bit more specifically as you said so
that's just yeah yeah it's quite an interesting point.
Lindsay Simon will report back to us on how that's going.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 0:57:52
Okay so Councillor Matheson.
Thank you Mark, good question.
Cllr Maz Hussain - 0:57:57
When the licence comes for renew and you move it to the enforcement officers, how long does that take?
If the driver goes for the renewal for his licence and obviously is moved to the enforcement
offices for any reason how long they pay.
It's a really difficult question to answer because it really just depends on the circumstances
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:58:18
of the case.
It might be, I mean after something, so it might be a case of we're relying on third
comes up where we know a driver's got a licence and another authority so we then do a DPA
request, Data Protection Act request for information and then we rely on that authority coming
back with us with information. It really just depends on the circumstances. It's difficult
for us to pinpoint it down. You know, I would say we try to resolve things as quickly as
But also it's balancing making sure that things are investigated properly
So if he if he doesn't get a response from the
Cllr Maz Hussain - 0:59:10
Neighbours parties or any other sort is what would you do that? What do you do then?
If you don't get a response say six months or three months
Again, it would depend on the the circumstances
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 0:59:21
So ultimately our legal obligation is to be satisfied that drivers are fit and proper and it really depends on on the circumstances
So if we receive an allegation for example, something really serious, we've got a really
difficult question mark because do we make that decision, take the driver off the road
based on the allegation and if we're not getting the information back, we're almost obliged
to get that information rather than risk having a driver out there that represents a risk
to the public.
But it's ultimately just a case by case.
Cllr Maz Hussain - 1:00:04
Do you have a cut off time or is there not? Is there a cut off time when you don't get a response to go back to the driver's house? You can't do it all yes.
Again, it just depends on the circumstances.
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 1:00:13
I mean, we might say if it's a less serious issue,
we might be waiting for information from a third party.
We might say, look, we need to make a decision about this driving.
And if we don't receive a response,
we've asked a couple of times, don't receive it within seven days,
we're going to be obliged to grant the licence.
But it's a really difficult question to answer.
to give a definitive, this is the way.
And that's, you know.
So in the report Simon mentioned it,
the turnaround time for driver licence applications,
Lindsay Vallis - Service Director for Communities - 1:00:47
and it's quite short, but it's only short, isn't it,
where we have all the appropriate evidence
and information provided with the applications,
where the application's valid,
and where all that information
has been appropriately provided.
In that case, I think we grant,
I think you said three days in the report,
The issue comes when it's a complex application,
there's additional information required,
and obviously we can't make a decision until we have the things
that we need to ensure the compliance with the policy.
At that point, at the point that that is available,
the licence will be quickly granted.
So for some it can be very fast because the application is valid,
they don't have any additional evidence or information
that we need to validate.
But for others it can be much longer, especially,
as Simon said, where we're relying on information
from other local authorities, other agencies like the police.
That can take time.
And that each is case by case.
Thank you.
Right, we're back to Councillor Collins.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 1:01:45
Thank you, Chairman.
My last question.
Cllr Michael Collins - 1:01:47
Are you aware of any national policies being
reviewed at the moment?
The court calls us on concern going forward.
I know there's a lot of talk about policies being changed
and being reviewed at the moment, but are you aware of anything in the pipeline that
nationally is being considered?
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 1:02:13
Well, I'd say the Taxi Private High legislation has been around for years and years, and it's
well overdue for review, and it's kind of all of a sudden we've got a lot of stuff coming
down the line you know we've got the the tax in private hire bill potentially
which could have significant changes to how taxing private hire licencing
arrangements are put in place we've got the national standards again not
mentioned in the report but we've got autonomous vehicles coming down the line
So there's actually quite a lot coming in and what we will do is continue to update
the committee in these regular reports as and when we know more information.
But a lot of it is kind of in the pipeline and I think over the next six, 12 months we're
going to be in a better position to update the committee on what the likely impacts are
for us locally in Buckinghamshire.
Thank you.
Councillor I did, Hussein.
Thank you Chairman and thank you Simon for the detailed report.
Cllr Majid Hussain - 1:03:29
My question is the appendix 3, the reason for a licence being revoked.
Now if somebody had say a couple of SP30s on their licence or talking up or driving,
drink driving convictions, now when they sent a letter or an email to notify them, their
licence has been revoked.
Is there a time scale that they are told before they can reapply for a licence and is the
that life has been revoked for?
No, so we, our appendix four of our policy
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 1:04:02
is what we call our, essentially it's our fit and proper person
policy.
It's how we deal with criminal behaviour
and undesirable behaviour.
And that sets out, it's a bit like rehabilitation periods.
So for certain types of offences,
So for the most serious offences, so sexual offences, murder, those sorts of things, what
our policy says is it takes a bright line, what we call a bright line approach, and says
we'll never grant you a licence. For less serious offences it comes down to like in terms of mobile
phone offence, so for example using mobile phone policies five years. So it's kind of like a sort
steeped approach if you like but it's all set out in the appendix 4 of our
policy which has been updated in the new policy to come in in September to
reflect the latest Institute licencing guidance which is where we essentially
draw that aspect of our policy from. Okay thank you any more questions from anyone?
Cllr Heather Wallace - 1:05:13
Councillor Hussain. Thank you very much. Just follow up once the procedures been
Cllr Mahboob Hussain JP - 1:05:18
So what happens next?
Once the, like we said,
this message of the,
last is being withdrawn for some reasons.
What will happen next?
The person got right to apply again with the timeframe?
Are you being, the person is notified
that you can reapply again after six months
or three months or three years or four years?
Or does that mean that you can't apply anymore?
Yeah, so as I explained earlier,
Simon Gallacher - Principal Licensing Officer - 1:05:50
we've kind of got our tiered approach that we take and then if you know in the
worst cases where as you say if a licence taken away so if it's like
refused or revoked the individual concerned is given a decision and
it's explained to them why the decision has been made the relevant aspects of
the policy that been taken into account what you know any other aspects of the
decision -making officers has taken into account the account that's provided by
the driver themselves and why that didn't you know tip the decision in
their favour. They're then directed to the policy and their right of appeal so all
the decisions are got 21 days to appeal to the magistrates so a lot of our you
know decisions do get appealed but then yes I say that within the decision -making
letter that they're sent it then directs them to the policy and then the policy
sets out those timeframes I've just just mentioned to come back. Obviously under
the policy each decision is considered on its merit and it's important whilst
we have those bright lines in our policy and say for these this type of offence
you know it's five years for this it's ten years we consider each case on its
merit so it's open to you know drivers can come back to us before that period
and say well actually I've done this, this and this and I think I should then be an exception
to the policy.
So yeah, does that help?
Thank you.
Right, okay.
So as we said this isn't a voting situation, it's just to note.
Cllr Heather Wallace - 1:07:26
So are members happy to indicate by show of hands that they have noted at this report?
Lovely, thank you very much.
Right, okay.
So that concludes the business and it's just the date of next meeting will be Tuesday the 22nd of this
September gosh and you said December September

7 Date of next meeting

At 630 so I declare this meeting closed and thank you very much for coming everyone