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
189
190 
No 0-licence for Revilo
Page 12
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IC Bell has again refused 0-licences to a firm set up to take over Oliver's
business. Mike Jewell reports.
TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER Beverley Bell has again refused to grant licences to Revilo Logistics, the company formed to take over the business of William Martin Oliver & Partners.
The Northumberland company attempted to exploit a rarely used provision in the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995, which enables aTC to review a decision if the defendant believes there's been a procedural irregularity.
Revilo sought a new international licence for 59 vehicles and 112 trailers in the North Eastern Traffic Area, and eight vehicles and 75 trailers in the North Western Traffic Area. The sole director ' and shareholder of the company is Stuart Oliver's wife Katharine. Oliver had been described as "a new broom" and she had the determination,expertise and resources to bring about a culture change. However, Bell was satisfied it would simply be "business as usual".
The partnership's continued financial links with Revilo Logistics and with Oliver meant there would be no clear division of responsibility and accountability; Bell was concerned who was actually in control of the business.
Katharine Oliver said the traffic examiners had not visited the premises since 2001 and they had not been back to look at the systems now in place. She appeared to be damned if she did and damned if she didn't, as she had been criticised for not getting involved in setting up new systems.
But theTC said she was satisfied that there had been no procedural irregularities and the matters raised were ones for the Tribunal to rule upon.