.jpg)
Bolton Council REVOKES private hire operator’s licences after failing to provide information about a driver
Bolton Council’s Licensing and Environment Regulatory Committee revoked both private hire operator licences held by the licence holder, citing a conviction for failing to provide information about a driver and a failure to declare the conviction.
The decision was recorded in the committee minutes for 6 October 2026. The report concerned alleged misconduct by a licensed private hire operator.
The operator attended the meeting without a representative and outlined his position. He asked the committee to consider further evidence, but the licensing officer objected because it had been submitted late and could not be reviewed or investigated before the hearing. The chair said evidence should have been sent in advance, as requested in the meeting invitation. The operator was allowed to summarise it during his submissions.
The committee also heard that Bury Council had sent the operator a warning letter.
Councillor Hewitt moved a motion to revoke both operator licences, seconded by Councillor Galloway. Five councillors voted in favour and three against. The motion was carried.
The committee cited a conviction dated 25 March 2026 for failing to provide information about the identity of a driver. It said the offence was classed as a major traffic offence under Bolton Council’s Statement of Fitness and Suitability, and that a conviction less than three years old would generally lead to a licence being revoked.
The committee said a fit and proper person would comply with police requests for information. It also found that the conviction had not been declared as required by the licence conditions, and that the operator had not provided a consistent explanation for failing to give the driver’s details or delaying notification to the licensing authority.
The minutes state that the operator was responsible for a large number of vehicles under the operator licence. The committee said compliance with the law was important in that position of responsibility and concluded there was reasonable cause to revoke both licences.
