licence declaration
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A former Deeside haulier, who admitted making a false declaration in an attempt to obtain the renewal of his 1 IG V driving licence, has been ordered to pay fines and costs totalling £450.
Paul Glendenning, of Green Lane, Shotton, had initially denied the charge but changed his plea to guilty when he appeared before Rochdale magistrates. In a series of earlier hearings Glendenning was ordered to pay fines and costs totalling £2,380 after being convicted of using vehicles without an Operator's Licence; without a Community Authorisation; without insurance; when the driver had committed a centre-field offence; displaying 0-licence discs with intent to deceive; driving a vehicle when not the holder of an I IGV driving licence; failing to give his name and address to an examiner; and failing to use a tachograph sheet (CM 4-10 and 11-17 Dec 1997).
Prosecuting for the Vehicle Inspectorate, John Heaton said that in June 1996 Glendenning applied to renew his HGV driving licence and declared he had no previous convictions in the application form, although there were a number of relevant convictions recorded against him.
In September 1995 he had been convicted by Halton magistrates of driving a vehicle when unlicensed and without insurance, and was fined £760. In October 1994 he had been convicted by Wirral magistrates of permitting the use of a vehicle with defective brakes, for which he was fined £600; and in July 1993 he had been convicted by Wrexham magistrates of driving without a licence and fined £100.
Defending, Ian Birch said it was surprising anyone should omit details of convictions from a licence application form when the DVLA had access to reportable convictions.
The false application had evidently been made by Glendenning in the futile hope that he would get his HGV licence renewed.
Glendenning was no longer trading as a haulier but was a self-employed motor mechanic earning £250 per week.
Fining Glendenning £300, and ordering him to pay 1150 prosecution costs, the magistrates said he had obviously been aware of the seriousness of the offence.
They could have fined Glendenning £2,500 but they had looked at his means and had to take a sensible view.