URL: https://tandridge.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=337

Decision Maker:

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: The Sub-Committee considered a request to install CCTV in a licensed vehicle.   It was noted that Tandridge District Council did not mandate the installation of CCTV in all licensed vehicles.  It was therefore a matter for individuals to request the Licensing Authority’s approval to install CCTV in their licensed vehicle(s).   The applicant had decided not to attend the hearing and instead chose to rely on the content of their written request and their further written submission, as included in a supplementary agenda pack for the meeting.   The Licensing Officer presented the report to the Sub-Committee and explained the background to the request.  The Licensing Officer stated that it was for the Sub-Committee to decide whether to agree to the request, to determine any limitations should it be minded to agree to the request, and to impose any appropriate conditions.   The Sub-Committee noted the applicant’s reasons for the request, in particular his concern for his and his passengers’ safety, following a number of incidents.   In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, the following information was provided:   ·       Recording equipment had to comply with the standards set out by the Information Commissioner’s Office.  There were a number of suppliers in the marketplace that provided specialist equipment to owners of licensed vehicles.   ·       Recording equipment was not accessible by the applicant. It could only be accessed by the local operator named on the written request.  The operator would be the designated data controller in accordance with the requirements of the GDPR.  The local operator was already registered as a data controller with the Information Commissioner’s Office as they handled individuals’ personal data to facilitate the minicab bookings that they made.   ·       The local operator had not been the subject of any complaints since they were established in 2023.  The operator’s owner had accrued approximately ten years’ experience.   ·       Footage would be the subject of a minimum retention period and could be requested at any time by the Licensing Authority and other authorised bodies or individuals such as the police.  The capturing of sound was ‘by exception’ and only when activated by either the customer or the applicant.   ·       Conditions would govern the use of recording equipment, in particular requiring its use at all times that the vehicle was being used for professional purposes.  This would not include occasions when it was being used as a private conveyance by the applicant.    ·       Licensing Officers considered the applicant to be a ‘fit and proper’ person, with him having received no convictions including for driving related matters.   ·       Determining the limitations of any agreement was a matter for the Licensing Sub-Committee i.e. it could limit its agreement to install CCTV to a specified vehicle, a specified vehicle and any vehicle that replaced it, or for any vehicle used by the applicant.   ·       Failure to comply with the conditions of the agreement could result in the applicant’s licence being reviewed by the Licensing Authority.   The hearing closed at 10.27am and Licensing Officers left the meeting room while the Sub-Committee deliberated on its decision.   At the conclusion of the Sub-Committee’s deliberations, Licensing Officers were called back into the Council Chamber to be informed of its decision.   Councillor Allen requested that his decision to abstain from voting, citing that he did not have enough information to enable him to form a view, be noted.   Notes on the Sub-Committee’s deliberations:   ·       The Sub-Committee, whilst noting that applicants could not be compelled to attend hearings, asked Licensing Officers to encourage their attendance in order to help inform the Sub-Committee’s consideration of their requests.   ·       The Sub-Committee requested that Licensing Officers give consideration to whether a policy for similar future requests was worth developing.   The decision of the Sub-Committee was:   1.     To grant the request install CCTV for up to one of the applicant’s vehicles at any one time, subject to the conditions set out in the schedule attached to these minutes.   2.     That in the event the applicant replaced his vehicle and wished to install CCTV within it, the conditions set out in the schedule be applied to the applicant’s replacement vehicle.   Note on the Sub-Committee’s decision: The Sub-Committee wished to clarify that any additional licensed vehicle used by the applicant in pursuance of his business, should he wish to install CCTV within it, would require another request to be made to the Licensing Authority.

Date of Decision: March 4, 2026