AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

IC reserves decision on licence bid following previous refusal

13th December 2007
Page 35
Page 35, 13th December 2007 — IC reserves decision on licence bid following previous refusal
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

WALSALL-BASED DC Haulage & Storage must wait to see if its second bid for an 0-licence is successful following a Birmingham public inquiry.

The company's initial application for a six-vehicle/ two-trailer licence had been refused by the then West Midland Traffic Commissioner David Dixon because of fraudulent bank statements and persistent illegal operation .That decision was upheld by the Transport Tribunal on appeal (`Firm of insufficient repute has licence appeal rejected'. CM 12 July).

Traffic examiner Gail Travers said that five days after the previous public inquiry, a vehicle belonging to the company had been impounded. Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) data showed that four vehicles had been sighted on 19, 53, 57 and 70 occasions between 1 .Tan uary and 14 August.

In September a truck that was not displaying an 0-licence disc had been stopped in a roadside check. The registered keeper was DC Haulage & Storage but it was not specified on any 0-licence.The driver said he had been delivering kitchen units to Coventry. DC Haulage & Storage had produced invoices from Sy uiresTransport,Wilde Transport UK,Clarkes Cabin Transport and Wolverhampton Hiab & Crane Hire in support of its assertion that the transport operations had been subcontracted hut none included specific details. Travers said she had been told there were no tachograph records as all the work was subcontracted.

Transport manager Darren Cookson said one of the vehicles was being used as a crane and he understood that as such it did not require an 0-licence. Two vehicles had been loaned to Wolverhampton Hiab & Crane Hire; the job the vehicle had been engaged on in September had been given to Wolverhampton Hiab & Crane.

Cookson disputed that the driver had been employed by his company and said if it was not granted a licence it would go to the European Court of Human Rights.

Disputing some of the ANPR data, he said the company had never had a truck in Bristol and on two of the dates it had not been working.


comments powered by Disqus