Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support
Minutes:
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting. In line with recent legislation for Civic
Government Hearings, the parties (and any representatives) were given the
options for participating in the meeting today.
The options available were by video call, by audio call or by written
submission. For this hearing the
Applicant opted to proceed by way of video call and joined the meeting by
Microsoft Teams.
Police Scotland opted to proceed by way of audio call and Sergeant
David Holmes joined the meeting by telephone.
The Chair referred to a preliminary matter and advised that Police
Scotland had requested the Committee take account of a number of spent
convictions the Applicant had which were considered “protected” in terms of the
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. It
was noted that the Committee may take into consideration evidence relating to
spent convictions, protected matters, and similar where they were satisfied
that justice could not be done except by admitting such evidence.
The Chair outlined the procedure that would be followed in this respect
and invited Police Scotland to address the relevancy of the protected matters
to this application.
POLICE SCOTLAND
Sergeant Holmes advised that there were various spent convictions that
were protected and that in line with public safety it was the Chief Constable’s
contention that justice could not be done in this case except by admitting this
evidence into the process so that the full facts were in front of the Committee
prior to determination of this application from Mr Jones.
The Chair then invited the Applicant to ask Police Scotland questions
and to address the relevancy of the protected matters to his application.
APPLICANT
Mr Jones said he was not sure exactly what the protected matters were
but that he would have no problem with them being made available to the
Committee. He confirmed that he had no
questions for Police Scotland.
The Chair then invited Police Scotland to comment on the Applicant’s
submission and Sergeant Holmes confirmed that he had nothing further to add.
The Chair then invited the Members to ask questions and determine the
relevancy of the protected matters.
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS AND DEBATE
Councillor Blair sought and received confirmation from Mr Jones that
all of his convictions were of a similar nature.
Councillor Kennedy asked Sergeant Holmes why some convictions were
protected and some were not. Sergeant
Holmes referred to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and explained that
it depended on the time of a conviction, the age of the offender and the
disposal of a case.
The Committee agreed that the protected matters should be taken into
consideration and a copy of the detail of these was circulated to the
Committee.
A short adjournment was taken and the Chair then outlined the hearing
procedure that would be followed and invited the Applicant to speak in support
of his application.
APPLICANT
Mr Jones referred to the objection to his application due to his
previous convictions and advised that he would be happy to explain what these
were about. He advised that since the
last conviction he had lived in Ukraine but then had to leave at the start of
the war in 2022. He said that while in
Ukraine he taught English and had military training. He and his family moved to England in March
2022 just after the war started. He said
they lived in London for 4 months before moving to Ardrishaig
and then Lochgilphead and that he currently worked
for a breakdown recovery company. He
said that since moving to the area he had also worked in a local pub and that
he continued to teach English online. He
said his employer at the Stag Garage was very pleased with his work and that he
had received good reviews online.
Mr Jones advised that it was suggested to him by various people in the
local community that he should apply to be a taxi driver. He said that he and his family had been
accepted by the community and that they had received a lot of help and that he
would like to put something back into the community and thought that this type
of work would benefit him, his wife and family, and the community. He referred to his past which, he said, he
could not deny and that he would be happy to answer any questions the Committee
may have.
QUESTIONS FROM POLICE SCOTLAND
Sergeant Holmes confirmed that he had no questions.
POLICE SCOTLAND
Sergeant Holmes referred to a letter from the Divisional Commander
dated 21 April 2023 which advised that the Chief Constable objected to this
application on the grounds that the Applicant was not a fit a proper person to
be the holder of a licence by virtue of five convictions dated 26 June 2008, 12
September 2012, 26 August 2013, 13 February 2014 and 13 March 2014 which he
explained the detail of.
He also referred to a further letter dated 21 April 2023 which outlined
seven spent convictions which were considered “protected” in terms of the
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, which he also explained the detail of.
QUESTIONS FROM APPLICANT
Mr Jones advised that he had no questions.
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS
Councillor Blair referred to the conviction dated 8 June 1988 which was
out of sync from the rest, which were in date order, and he received
confirmation from Sergeant Holmes that this was correct.
Councillor Blair asked Mr Jones to confirm if he could guarantee that
since moving to Argyll things had calmed down for him and that he had since
changed his ways. He pointed out to Mr
Jones that as a Taxi Driver he would be driving members of the public on behalf
of the Committee and that the Committee wanted the very best people doing this.
Mr Jones said that there had been a long gap between now and when
things went wrong from him. He commented
that his last conviction was in 2016. He
advised that his life was troubled in England and that it got to a point he
decided he had to move himself from the situation. He said that he’d had a decent business in
Sussex chartering yachts and that he had sold up and moved to Ukraine and had a
good life out there. He said he was
awarded medals for all the good he had done in Ukraine. He advised that he appreciated that his past
would raise concerns. He advised that he
wanted to be calm and that he had moved to a beautiful part of the world with
his wife and step son.
He said it had been very hard last year but they had now settled into
life in Argyll and that they have been treated so well. He said he would like to give back to the
community and settle in Lochgilphead. He referred to many activities he was
involved in including lawn bowls and tennis.
He said he was very helpful in the community. He said he could understand concerns raised
and that if his daughter got into a taxi with someone with his colourful past,
he would raise questions too. He gave
his assurance that things had changed.
He advised that over the years he received counselling and also delivered
a counselling course so that he could help others. He said he had tried to turn things around to
help others.
Councillor Kennedy commented that some of the older convictions would
have been when Mr Jones was very young so may be excusable. However, he advised he was more concerned
about the more recent convictions from 2008 onwards. He pointed out that there was a lot of road
traffic offences with disqualifications for driving which, he said, indicated a
lack of respect. He asked Mr Jones why
he was disqualified from driving in 2014.
Mr Jones said he was living in Dorset at the time. He said he was not aware that the Police had
contacted the DVLA and that his licence had been cancelled. He said that he had moved away and did not
get the notification. He said he found
out when he was driving in Sussex which lead to a disqualification. He said it was down to misinformation but it
was his fault.
Councillor Kennedy referred to Mr Jones being disqualified from driving
again in 2016. Mr Jones said he was not
aware of that, he read out a list of convictions and said that he disputed some
of those listed in the Police letter. Mr
Jones said that he had a problem with the Dorset Police and that he had taken
them to court. He had to sign a
non-disclosure agreement with them as they admitted fault but he could not talk
about it. Mr Jones advised that had he
been aware that he was disqualified he would not have driven. He said that he’d had insurance and that he’d
still had his licence. He said it was
down to miscommunication. He said he
could not deny he was not allowed to drive but he was not aware.
Councillor Kennedy sought and received confirmation from Mr Jones that
he moved to Ukraine in May 2015 and returned to England on 2 March 2022. Mr Jones advised that he’d had no issues with
the Police in Ukraine and that he had done some very good and worthy things
there. He referred to the local press,
the Argyllshire Advertiser, doing a touching article about him which could be
read online.
Councillor Kennedy sought and received confirmation of the type of
military training Mr Jones received in Ukraine.
Mr Jones advised that as he could speak French, English, Italian and some
Ukrainian he was commissioned by the Ukraine Army to meet and greet and to make
sure information passed on was understood.
He advised that he lived behind the military academy and that he had
taught English there.
Councillor Green sought and received confirmation from Sergeant Holmes
that the court conviction dated 19 May 2016 was as a result of an offence which
took place on 13 April 2015.
Councillor Green sought and received confirmation from Mr Jones that he
briefly came back to Sussex in 2016 to see his daughter and had attended that
court hearing on 19 May 2016.
Councillor Wallace sought and received some background on the
harassment convictions. Mr Jones
referred to being in breach of a restraining order. He said that owning a business with someone
in the same place had caused problems.
Referring to the incident in question, he said the door was banged but
the window was not smashed. He said that he had not been aware at that time
that there was a restraining order. He
said he eventually moved away from Dorset.
He said he had felt victimised by the Dorset Police and that was why he
sued them and had to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
Councillor Kennedy asked for details of the circumstances which led to
the destruction of property. Mr Jones
said the property was his. He advised
that it happened when a severe toxic relationship was breaking down. He said it was a very volatile situation.
Councillor Brown commented that there seemed to be a lot of things that
had happened to Mr Jones that he was not aware of such as the harassment order
and the loss of his driving licence. She
said that she appreciated that things had changed and that Mr Jones had moved
on. She pointed out that the Committee
had a big responsibility to ensure that members of the community were
safe.
Mr Jones said that things did not make sense to him either and that he
too would be concerned. He said he was
confused about some of the dates in the Police letters and that some of these
went back a long time.
Councillor Brown said she was not looking at the earlier dates as these
were a long time ago. She said she had
more concern about the convictions dated 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2016. She pointed out that these were only around
10 years ago. She said she appreciated
that Mr Jones had been in a difficult situation and that she was a great one
for giving someone another chance but at the moment she was concerned and
conflicted.
Mr Jones replied that hindsight was a wonderful thing. He commented that his mental health had been
impacted by staying in his previous relationship and referred to family
abandonment issues. He said he was not
trying to sugar coat things or excuse himself.
He said that he had done some stupid things without care and thought to
himself and to others. He said he was sorry
and that he would rather not be sitting here trying to explain things which, he
advised, were embarrassing and shameful.
He said he took ownership for his past and that what he had done was not
deniable. He advised that a lot of
things had been done without care or thought and in the spur of the moment.
Councillor Kennedy sought and received confirmation from Mr Jones that
he met his wife in Ukraine and that they were married a year and a half later
in September 2016 and that she knew all about his past. He said it was his last choice to come back
to England but they had to keep his family safe. He advised that he had taken on
responsibility for his step son and wife and that they had a good life in
Argyll. He said it had not been easy for
his wife to move away from her home. He
said her English was not good and that she was a bit timid and that his son had
recently been diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (HDHD)
and Autism.
Councillor Kennedy sought and received confirmation from Mr Jones that
they moved to Lochgilphead in September 2022. They initially had a private rent in Ardrishaig but moved to an ACHA flat after 3 months.
Councillor Kennedy asked Mr Jones why he had not declared his
convictions on his application form. Mr
Jones said he had sought advice from the Council’s legal staff and was told
that if his convictions were more than 5 years old they did not need to be declared. He said that he had offered to put them on the
form but was told not to. He
acknowledged that he should have read the form more carefully himself.
Councillor Blair sought assurance from Mr Jones that what was in the
past was in the past and that he would be a quality taxi driver in the area.
Mr Jones said he could not deny his past. He said that when he left for Ukraine he did
not want to get into another toxic relationship or be in the kind of trouble he
was in Dorset again. He said he would be
happy with a probationary period. He
said his wife had helped him through these years and that he wanted to be calm
in a great community.
Councillor Blair commented that section 2 of the application form was
not clear and he asked if Officers could look at that part of the form to make
it easier to understand and complete.
Councillor Kennedy referred to the 2014 conviction for driving with
excess alcohol and asked Mr Jones if he had attended court on that
occasion. Mr Jones said that he thought
that he had.
Councillor Kennedy sought and received confirmation from Sergeant
Holmes that Police Scotland did not routinely contact applicants about their
previous convictions before submitting objections.
SUMMING UP
Police Scotland
Sergeant Holmes advised that he had nothing further to add.
Applicant
Mr Jones thanked the Committee for taking the time to hear what he had
to say. He also thanked them for their
concerns which, he said, he understood fully.
When asked, both parties confirmed that they had received a fair
hearing.
DEBATE
Councillor Brown said she would like to approve this application. She said that Mr Jones had answered a lot of
questions and that she would like to give him a chance. She advised that she thought he deserved this
chance and that she would like to move that the application be approved.
Councillor Kennedy advised that he had concerns with this application
at this time. He pointed out that Mr
Jones had a history which showed not much consideration for driving regulations
combined with alcohol related offences. He
referred to a gap of 5 or 6 years when Mr Jones was not in this country and to
him advising that he had no issues while living in Ukraine. He commented that Mr Jones had only been back
in this country a few months. He advised
that some of the convictions showed Mr Jones to possibly have a bit of a temper
and that driving a taxi may not be the best environment for Mr Jones depending
on the customer. He advised that he was
tempted to refuse the application and, giving more time, Mr Jones could apply
again. He commented that Mr Jones had a
job at the moment and had a full driving licence.
Councillor Howard said that she would second Councillor Brown’s
motion. She said that she thought Mr
Jones had gone through a lot in his life and that she would like to give him a
chance to make a go of his new life living here with his family.
Councillor Hardie said he would support Councillor Kennedy if he put
forward an amendment to refuse.
Councillor Blair said he concurred with the thoughts of Councillor
Brown and Councillor Howard. He advised
that Mr Jones had demonstrated remorse for his previous activities. He commented that living in a small community
all eyes would be on him and that any misdemeanour would be reported straight
to the Council and the Police. He said
that he liked to see someone given a hand to get on and that Mr Jones would be
well aware of the Committee’s expectations of a taxi driver in Argyll and
Bute. He said he would be supportive of
this application.
Motion
To agree to grant a Taxi Driver Licence to Mr Jones.
Moved by Councillor Jan Brown, seconded by Councillor Fiona Howard.
Amendment
To agree to refuse Mr Jones’ application for a Taxi Driver Licence on
the grounds that he was not a fit and proper person to be the holder of the licence.
Moved by Councillor Paul Donald Kennedy, seconded by Councillor Graham
Hardie.
A vote was taken by calling the roll.
Motion Amendment No Vote
Councillor Blair Councillor Green Councillor
D Hampsey
Councillor J Brown Councillor
A Hampsey (due
to having technical
Councillor Howard Councillor Hardie issues and not being Councillor
Kennedy present for the whole Councillor McCabe hearing)
Councillor Martin
Councillor Wallace
The Amendment was carried by 7 votes, with 3 votes for the Motion and 1
no vote, and the Committee resolved accordingly.
DECISION
The Committee agreed to refuse Mr Jones’ application for a Taxi Driver
Licence on the grounds that he was not a fit and proper person to be the holder
of the licence by virtue of his previous convictions.
(Reference: Report by Head of Legal and Regulatory Support, submitted)