AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

`Phoenix' firm licence bid held up

15th August 2002, Page 16
15th August 2002
Page 16
Page 16, 15th August 2002 — `Phoenix' firm licence bid held up
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?

A Cheshire firm branded a "phoenix" company by the Road Haulage Association at a Leeds Public Inquiry has had its application for an operating licence adjourned.

Alsager-based Pollard Services, trading as Freight Logistics, appeared in front of North Western Traffic Commissioner Beverley Bell to seek a new international licence for 10 vehicles and 15 trailers. But the application was opposed by the RHA on the grounds of finance, repute and alleged unauthorised use.

The nominated transport manager, Stephen Ball, was formerly a director of Danesbury Freight Services, which held a licence for 71 vehicles and 58 trailers from the same address, but which is now in

For Pollard Services, Paul Carless said that the application arose after managing director John Redfern spotted a business opportunity. It was not a case of a phoenix company, it was a much smaller operation with much tighter manage

ment, he said. There had been no problems over the six months the company had been operating six vehicles under interim authority and, despite the RHA objection having been submitted five months ago, no evidence of the alleged unauthorised use had been produced.

For the RHA, Mike Farmer said that it considered Pollard Services to be a phoenix company as it had received information from other operators that led it to believe that the firm had operated illegally for a period of time.

Pollard Services' licence application was signed by Ball in September 2001. Danesbury Freight's liquidator was appointed on 11 January this year. At that time that company owed 11.6 million to 124 unsecured creditors, of which 25 were members of the FHA.

Contending that Pollard Services had continued to operate in place of Danesbury Freight from 11 to 24 January, Farmer said that Air Bags international, of Congleton, had confirmed to him that all of its transport had been carried out by Danesbury Freight and now by Pollard Services without a break and using the same vehicles. As a result Air Bags International considered that Pollard Services had acted in disregard of the requirements of the 0-licensing system.

Ball denied that Pollard Services had operated without licence authority for a period, saying that the Air Bags International work during the period concerned was covered by 3.5-tonne vehicles and by subcontracting.

Bell revoked Danesbury Freight's licence and adjourned the hearing of Pollard Services' application until the beginning of October.