1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188 
Tribunal uphold TC's decision about "web of deceit" MD
Page 36
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE REVOCATION of a licence for tachograph tampering has been upheld after a IC accused the guilty operator of "deceit".
The managing director of Crewe-based Trapstar was said to have had a bogus two-yearly tachograph check sticker put on one of the trucks held on its fivevehicle, six-trailer licence.
Trapstar was called before the North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Patrick Mulvenna after a traffic examiner stopped one of its vehicles and found several faults.
The speed limiter was not working; the tachograph head had an unauthorised seal and the tachograph was incorrectly calibrated. In revoking the licence, the DTC concluded that managing director John Marsden had "woven a web of deceit".
The effect was to give the appearance that the tachograph was in good order and that the vehicle was operating lawfully. It was not. The speed limiter was not working and the tachograph was not properly calibrated.
The vehicle was unsafe as it could be operated at speeds in excess of the speed limit, giving the company an unfair advantage over its competitors. The Transport Tribunal were told that the revocation meant that Marsden and his wife would suffer severe hardship, as their income would be severely reduced and they would no longer be able to live at the operating centre which had been their home for 30 years. In the circumstances they considered that revocation was too harsh.
Disagreeing, the Tribunal said that Marsden was the managing director and transport manager and he was directly responsible for the matters that caused the DTC to find the company was no longer of good repute. Revocation was entirely appropriate.