Appeal decision of NZTA — declining to renew P endorsement — passenger endorsement — driver licence — Uber driver — fit and proper person — careless driving — ignoring formal warning — relevant previous conviction — Land Transport Act 1998, ss 30C, 30D, 35, 106 — Hornblow v New Zealand Transport Agency [2018] NZDC 10875 — Munday v Director of Land Transport Safety DC Auckland NP5748/97, 9 June 1998 — Pratap v New Zealand Transport Agency [2016] NZDC 13622. This was an appeal against a decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) declining to renew the appellant's P endorsement on his driver licence. The appellant is an Uber driver and required the passenger endorsement to be able to operate as a driver. He had been convicted in 2011 of operating a vehicle carelessly, and received two formal warnings for the same in 2014 and 2018. The NZTA declined to renew his endorsement on the grounds that he was not a fit and proper person to hold such an endorsement. Sections 30C and 30D of the Land Transport Act laid out the criteria that the NZTA is to use for assessing whether a person is fit and proper, which included interests of public safety, a person's criminal history, offending in respect of transport-related offences, and any persistent offending of any kind. Given the appellant's relevant history, the Judge upheld the NZTA's decision that he was not a fit and proper person for the purposes of holding a P endorsement. The Judge noted that the appellant should not have repeatedly ignored formal warnings which potentially put the public at risk if he needed the income from driving in order to support himself. The appellant would be able to reapply for an endorsement after a sufficient period of time had elapsed without further incident. The appeal was dismissed. Judgment Date: 6 March 2020.