Decision details

Application considered

The Licensing Sub-Committee heard an application for a new Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence (PHVDL). 

The applicant previously applied for a PHVDL on 11 December 2023, and which was heard by the Licensing Sub-Committee on 8 May 2024. That application was refused due to the existence of a conviction for a relevant offence.

The applicant reapplied for a PHVDL on 27 October 2025.

A criminal record check conducted on the applicant shows no further convictions save for the conviction that led to the 2024 refusal.

The application has been referred to the Licensing Sub-Committee to determine whether the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a PHVDL issued by Fenland District Council. 

The Licensing Sub-Committee considered the report from the Licensing Officer.

The Licensing Sub-Committee heard from the applicant.

Law and guidance considered

In making its decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee considered all relevant legislation, as well as both the statutory (Department for Transport) and non-statutory (Institute of Licensing) guidance.

Legal advice provided

The Licensing Sub-Committee were reminded that when assessing suitability, the safety of the public is the paramount concern and that the test as to whether an individual should be granted a PHVDL is whether the individual is a fit and proper person. The Licensing Sub-Committee were reminded of Fenland District Council’s Hackney Carriage and Private Vehicle Hire Licensing Policy 2021-2026 as well as the statutory (Department of Transport) and non-statutory (Institute of Licensing) guidance.

The Licensing Sub-Committee were reminded that their decision should be evidence-based.

Matters found to be irrelevant in this case

The applicant’s Peterborough operation.

Decision

To grant a Private Hire Vehicle Driver’s Licence as applied for.

Reasons for the decision

The Sub-Committee considered an application for a PHVDL from the applicant.

The applicant was refused a PHVDL in 2024 but was encouraged to come back after five years had elapsed from his conviction. That period has now passed.

The Committee were assured by the applicant’s disclosure that since his conviction he has been married and become a father, both of which have changed his responsibilities and views on matters.

The Committee hopes that the applicant remains free of convictions as future convictions would likely to prove detrimental to his licences with this authority.