Home>Security>Guarding>Door supervisor convicted at Merthyr Tydfil Magistrates’ Court for licensing offences
Home>Security Matters>Security Matters>Door supervisor convicted at Merthyr Tydfil Magistrates’ Court for licensing offences
ARTICLE

Door supervisor convicted at Merthyr Tydfil Magistrates’ Court for licensing offences

10 November 2020

ON WEDNESDAY 28 October, 21-year-old Jarrad Skidmore of Caerphilly was convicted at Merthyr Tydfil Magistrates’ Court of working as a door supervisor while his Security Industry Authority (SIA) licence was suspended.

The presiding Judge at the Magistrates’ Court convicted Skidmore on two counts of infringement of the Private Security Industry Act 2001. He was duly sentenced to pay a fine of £300, court costs of £2,300 and court charges of £32.

This was, in fact, Skidmore’s second conviction in a year as he was prosecuted on 18 March 2020 by South Wales Police at Cardiff Crown Court for the possession of a prohibited weapon.

On 7 March this year, SIA investigators were carrying out routine compliance checks in Aberdare. They found Skidmore working illegally at the Lighthouse Bar. He was displaying an SIA licence, although that licence had been suspended on 18 November 2019. The suspension arose as a result of information about his arrest being passed to the SIA by South Wales Police.

During the SIA’s investigation, Skidmore claimed that he thought Cardiff Crown Court would notify the SIA of his conviction and that he was not responsible for the disclosure. However, the conditions of Skidmore’s SIA licence clearly state that he must advise the SIA of any previous or new conviction.

Skidmore stated that he was unaware the SIA had told him that his working licence had been suspended on 18 November 2019. However, Skidmore had been in contact with the SIA a week earlier to request a replacement licence as he claimed that it was lost.

Nathan Salmon, criminal investigations manager at the SIA, said: “Skidmore was convicted earlier this year for an offence relating to a taser and was therefore deemed unsuitable for a licence. He deliberately sought to undermine the licensing regime, which is there to protect the public, by concealing this conviction from us. He naively thought that he could break his licence conditions. This conviction means that he’s now unable to work in the private security industry. He also has another criminal conviction against his name.”

 
OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS SECTION
FEATURED SUPPLIERS
TWITTER FEED