To receive declarations of personal and prejudicial interest (if any) from Members/Officers in accordance with the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct adopted by Council from 1 September 2008.

None.

The Corporate Director – Operational and Partnership Services submitted a report, that requested the Sub-Committee to consider an application to grant a licence for a private hire vehicle.

The Team Manager – Licensing advised that the application was made by Mr. J Bickerstaff to licence a Renault Traffic vehicle registration number SH11 XLJ as the above, to seat 8 persons.

She added that the vehicle was not wheelchair accessible, but there were specific policy guidelines in respect of the first licensing of private hire vehicles which fall outside policy guidelines, as explained in paragraph 4.4 of the report.

Members then proceeded to examine the vehicle which was situated in the Civic Offices basement car park.

Upon the meeting reconvening, the Team Manager – Licensing confirmed that there were 62,781 miles on the milometer of the vehicle.

The Team Manager – Licensing asked the applicant if he had anything to say in support of the application.

Mr. Bickerstaff advised that the vehicle was in sound condition with a full service history. He did not wish for it to be wheelchair accessible, due to the fact that he wished it to remain an 8 seater vehicle in order to maximise earnings from the vehicle.

RESOLVED:                    That the application made by Mr. J Bickerstaff for the grant of a licence of the above vehicle as a private hire vehicle be granted, due to the Sub-Committee being satisfied that there was sufficient reason to depart from the Council’s Licensing Policy in this instance.

The Corporate Director – Operational and Partnership Services submitted a report, that requested the Sub-Committee to consider an application to grant a licence for a hackney hire vehicle.

The Team Manager – Licensing advised that the application was made by Mr. L Lewis to licence a Vauxhall Zafira registration number CA14 OLP as the above, to seat 6 persons.

She added that the vehicle was not wheelchair accessible, and that records showed that this vehicle was previously licensed as a hackney carriage until 25 May 2016. The report also outlined that a vehicle service history was supplied with the application, but that the application fell outside the hackney carriage vehicle policy, including the existing discretion to relax the hackney carriage age policy in respect of wheelchair accessible vehicles.

Members then proceeded to examine the vehicle which was situate in the Civic Offices basement car park.

Upon the meeting reconvening, the Team Manager – Licensing confirmed that there were 71,692 miles on the milometer of the vehicle.

The reasons as to why the application fell outside of policy guidelines were contained in paragraph 4.4 of the report.

The Team Manager – Licensing asked the applicant if he had anything to say in support of the application.

Mr. Lewis advised that as the report stated, the above vehicle was previously licensed as a hackney carriage, up until the main Vauxhall dealer took all Zafira models of this age group off the road, as they all had shown a common fault whereby some of these type of vehicles were catching on fire. The work has now been completed.

RESOLVED:                    That the application made by Mr. L Lewis for the grant of a licence of the above vehicle as a hackney carriage vehicle be granted, due to the Sub-Committee being satisfied that there was sufficient reason to depart from the Council’s Licensing Policy in this instance.

The Corporate Director – Operational and Partnership Services submitted a report, that requested the Sub-Committee to consider an application to grant a licence for a hackney hire vehicle.

The Team Manager – Licensing advised that the application was made by Mr. R Parrott to licence a Seat Toledo registration number CU17 TTY as the above, to seat 4 persons.

She added that the vehicle was not wheelchair accessible, and that the application fell outside the Hackney Carriage Vehicle Policy approved by the Licensing Committee, including the existing discretion to relax the hackney carriage age policy in respect of wheelchair accessible vehicles.

Members then proceeded to examine the vehicle which was situate in the Civic Offices basement car park.

Upon the meeting reconvening, the Team Manager – Licensing confirmed that there were 46 miles on the milometer of the vehicle.

The reasons as to why the application fell outside of policy guidelines were contained in paragraph 4.4 of the report.

The Team Manager – Licensing asked Mr. Francis who was representing the applicant if he had anything to say in support of the application, to which he replied that he had nothing to add.

RESOLVED:                    That the application made by Mr. R Parrott for the grant of a licence of the above vehicle as a hackney carriage vehicle be granted, due to the Sub-Committee being satisfied that there was sufficient reason to depart from the Council’s Licensing Policy in this instance.

To consider any other item(s) of business in respect of which notice has been given in accordance with Rule 4 of the Council Procedure Rules and which the person presiding at the meeting is of the opinion should by reason of special circumstances be transacted at the meeting as a matter of urgency.

None.

The report relating to the following item is not for publication as it contains exempt information as defined in Paragraph 12 of Part 4 and/or Paragraph 21 of Part 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information)(Variation)(Wales) Order 2007.

If following the application of the public interest test the Committee resolves pursuant to the Act to consider this item in private, the public will be excluded from the meeting during such consideration.

RESOLVED:                  That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) (Wales) Order 2007, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business as it contained exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 12 of Part 4 and/or Paragraph 21 of Part 5 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

                                       Following application of the public interest test it was resolved that pursuant to the Act referred to above to consider the following item in private, with the public excluded from the meeting, as it was considered that in all the circumstances relating to the item, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information, because the information would be prejudicial to the applicant.