The Public Protection Sub Committee of Cardiff Council met on Wednesday 8 July 2026 to discuss several Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licence matters. The committee made decisions on four applications, resulting in a suspension, a revocation, a written warning, and no further action being taken. One application was deferred to a future meeting.

Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Matters

The committee considered several applications concerning the suitability of drivers to hold Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Driver's Licences.

Application 1: Suspension of Licence

The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to hold a licence after accumulating 12 points on his driving licence. The driver's friend addressed the committee, highlighting the driver's 30 years of experience with no public complaints and his compassionate nature, including providing free rides to vulnerable individuals. The driver apologised for a mobile phone offence at traffic lights, stating a second offence felt unfair and he was unable to appeal due to financial constraints. Members questioned the second mobile phone offence, with the driver explaining he was checking on a passenger's safe exit. He confirmed he had not been disqualified for totting up 12 points as he had applied for exceptional hardship.

Decision: The Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver's Licence was suspended for 7 days.

Application 2: Revocation of Licence

The Sub Committee reviewed an application where a driver had failed to provide his Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certificate since renewing his licence. The driver did not attend the meeting.

Decision: The Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver's Licence was revoked.

Application 3: Written Warning Issued

The committee considered an application from a driver who had been disqualified from driving for six months after accumulating points. The driver explained that he had misjudged speed limits in 20mph zones, believing them to be 30mph. He stated that the disqualification had impacted his income and increased his insurance costs. Members inquired about the specific speeds, with the driver recalling 35mph in a 30mph zone and 26mph in a 20mph zone, with passengers present on both occasions in the latter. The driver suggested one speed camera was difficult to see, a point Members dismissed as irrelevant. He confirmed he had not applied for exceptional hardship, as advised by his solicitor.

Decision: The driver received a written warning.

Application 4: No Further Action

The Sub Committee assessed an application from a driver who had declared six points on his driving licence. The driver explained that two speeding offences, each resulting in three points, occurred on the same day when the speed limit changed from 40mph to 36mph, which he believed was still a 40mph zone. These points had since expired, leaving him with three points for a speeding offence in January 2025, which he attributed to tiredness at the end of a long shift. He was not carrying a passenger at the time and was en route home. The driver's representative added that an appeal was pending regarding a camera calibration issue, but the driver accepted responsibility for exceeding the limit. A hardship application had been granted.

Decision: No further action was taken.

Application 5: Deferred

This application was deferred to the next meeting.