23.
MINUTES
RESOLVED
:
THAT the Minutes
of the meeting held on 16 November 2004
be confirmed.
24.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no
declarations of interest made at this stage.
25.
REPORTS OF THE HEAD OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
Prior to consideration of the items
of business set out in Minute 25(b) & Minute 25(c), the applicants, Mr K
Pont, Mr M Bull and Mr G Turner agreed, for training purposes only, for Cllr A
Taylor and the Council’s Environmental Services Manager to remain present,
should the Panel agree to go into private session. It was confirmed that they both would take no part in the
discussion or the decision thereon.
(a) Appeal Against Private Hire Vehicle
Conditions which Prevent the Licensing of an Ex Fire Appliance
Members were
referred to the report of the Head of Consumer Protection which set out the
reasons as to why the appeal against the refusal by the Council’s Principal
Licensing Officer to grant a Private Hire Vehicle Licence, for an ex fire
appliance, had been deferred from the last meeting.
It was noted
that the Licensing Panel had then had an opportunity to view the vehicle and
had asked for additional conditions to be considered and for other specific
investigations to be carried out.
Since the
previous meeting discussions had taken place to satisfy the necessary
requirements proposed by the Panel. A copy of ten licence conditions, which
Members understood had been agreed between the applicant and the Council’s
Principal Licensing officer and had been attached to the licence, were
circulated to members of the Panel for consideration, together with a set of
coloured photographs of the vehicle.
The Panel made a
number of minor additions to the conditions, which focussed primarily on the
issues of public safety raised by the application. The Panel were content to
agree to the granting of a licence, under delegated authority, subject to the
addition of the ten conditions outlined and of the minor amendments proposed.
RESOLVED
:
THAT
the vehicle, registration No E141 XDS, be licensed for Private Hire use,
subject to the agreement of the applicant to the additional conditions
circulated at the meeting and to the further additional conditions proposed by
the Licensing Panel, and that such a licence be issued under delegated authority
to the Principal Licensing Officer.
(b)
To Consider an Appeal against the Council’s Decision to
Refuse an Application to Increase the Seating Capacity of Purpose Built Taxis
so that a Passenger can be Accommodated next to the Driver
The report of
the Head of Consumer Protection was received which set out details of the
appeal by Mr K Pont and Mr M Bull of 10 Victoria Crescent, Elmfield, Ryde
against the refusal by the Council’s Licensing Officer to licence a Peugeot
Euro Taxi for six passengers with, in particular, the option of accommodating
one person in the front passenger seat.
The application had been refused on the grounds of concern for public
safety and of the driver, should the passengers not be contained within the
passenger compartment. It would also
ensure that the space next to the driver could also be used for luggage,
particularly when being used to accommodate a wheelchair.
The Panel noted
that no comments had been received in response to the formal consultation
process and that a general comment had been received from the Isle of Wight
Taxi Proprietors Association requesting discussions to take place with the IW
Council to clarify and review the Council’s current policy.
The applicants,
Mr Pont and Mr Bull were present and outlined their case. It was confirmed that although the vehicle
had been purposefully built to carry seven passengers, it was currently
licenced to carry six passengers in the rear of the vehicle only. The applicants now wished to amend that
licence so to be able to accommodate a passenger in the front passenger seat,
should the occasion demand it.
The Panel
adjourned to view the vehicle. Upon
reconvening and following further presentations and questions by both parties
and questions by the Panel, it was moved and seconded that the public and press
be excluded from the meeting.
RESOLVED
:
THAT, under
Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be
excluded from the meeting for part of this item, on the grounds that there was
likely to be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 4, of
Part 1, of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Upon reconvening
in public it was indicated that the Panel, having heard the evidence submitted
by the applicant and by the Principal Licensing Officer, understood that the
issue was the availability of the front passenger seat for passenger use,
whilst maintaining the total number of passenger seats to six. The Panel carefully considered the issue of
public safety of both the driver and passengers. On the basis of the evidence
given the Panel considered that their decision was reasonable, proportionate
and in accordance with the legitimate aims of the Council.
RESOLVED
:
THAT the appeal
against the Council’s decision to refuse a Hackney Carriage vehicle licence for
a Peugeot Euro Taxi, registration No W567 XGA, to carry a maximum of 6 persons,
by removing one tip-up seat in the rear of the vehicle, but retaining the use
of the front passenger seat be upheld.
(c)
Appeal Against the Decision to Refuse to Licence a Private
Hire Mercedes ‘Vito’ for Eight Passengers
Members received
the report detailing the appeal submitted by Mr G Turner, of 114 High Street,
Ryde against the refusal by the Council’s Principal Licensing Officer to grant
a Private Hire Vehicle licence for eight passengers. The vehicle, a Mercedes
Vito, did not comply with the Council’s licence condition No 14(d), in that it
had a tip-up seat.
The Panel noted
that the vehicle was currently licensed to carry seven passengers, which had
necessitated the removal of the tip up seat.
It was also noted that the Isle of Wight Taxi Proprietors had requested
that discussions be held to clarify and review the Council’s current policy.
The Panel
adjourned to view the vehicle.
Upon
reconvening, Mr Turner, who was present addressed the Panel and outlined his
case explaining his need, for business reasons, for a licence to accommodate
the extra seating capacity.
Following
further presentations and questions by both parties and questions by the Panel,
it was moved and seconded that the public and press be excluded from the
meeting.
RESOLVED
:
THAT, under
Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be
excluded from the meeting for part of this item, on the grounds that there was
likely to be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 4, of
Part 1, of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Upon reconvening
in public it was indicated that the Panel had considered the evidence put
before it and had viewed the vehicle internally. The Panel had considered carefully the issue of public safety and
had particularly taken into account the ease of ingress and egress of the
vehicle concerned. The Panel were satisfied
that their decision was reasonable and proportionate and in accordance with the
legitimate aims of the Council.
RESOLVED :
THAT the appeal
against the Council’s refusal to grant a private Hire Vehicle licence for a
Mercedes Vito, vehicle registration No DF04 KVL, for a maximum of eight
passengers be upheld.
Prior to consideration of the
following item of business the applicant, Mrs J H Rounsevell, agreed, for
training purposes only, for the Council’s Environmental Services Manager to
remain present, should the Panel agree to go into private session. It was confirmed that he would take no part
in the discussion or the decision thereon.
(d)
Request by an Operator to Display an Executive Style Plate
in Place of the Council’s Standard Identity Plate
The Head of
Consumer Protection reported on the written request received from Mrs J H
Rounsevell, of Rounsevell Executive Cars for an exemption from displaying the
Council’s yellow identity plate and to display the smaller Executive style
plate, for two Mercedes Vito cars registration Nos W10 JHR and W11 JHR, in its
place. Samples of the two styles of
plates were circulated for information
The Panel
adjourned to view the vehicles.
Upon
reconvening, the applicant Mrs Rounsevell addressed the Panel explaining that
the cars, both 6 seater people-carriers, were aimed for the executive user and
were necessary to compete with mainland companies.
Following
further presentations and questions by both parties and questions by the Panel,
it was moved and seconded that the public and press be excluded from the
meeting.
RESOLVED
:
THAT, under
Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be
excluded from the meeting for part of this item, on the grounds that there was
likely to be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 4, of
Part 1, of Schedule 12A of the Act.
Upon reconvening
in public, it was indicated that the Panel, in considering the evidence before
them, decided that the information given by the applicant to be insufficient to
justify the request for use of the Executive style plates. The Panel also considered the number of
executive style plates currently in use within the taxi trade at present and
that exemption should be the exception rather than the rule. The Panel also wished it to be known that,
if in the event additional evidence was produced, the matter could be
re-considered.
RESOLVED
:
THAT the
request received from Rounsevell Executive Cars for two exemptions from
displaying the Council’s Identity Plate for two Mercedes cars, registration Nos
W10 JHR and W11 JHR, be refused.
CHAIRMAN
