AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal accepts explanation but rejects appeal

29th November 1974
Page 17
Page 17, 29th November 1974 — Tribunal accepts explanation but rejects appeal
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 SCOTTISH haulier who had not attended a public inquiry at which one of his vehicle licences was suspended had his explanation of why he did not turn up accepted by the Transport Tribunal last week but his appeal was rejected.

The Tribunal accepted that Mr R. W. Richmond had a genuine explanation the letter telling him of the hearing was destroyed by another member of his family and had intended no disrespect to the Licensing Authority.

In a written judgment, the Tribunal says that the action taken by the LA had, however, been fully justified. But, as the vehicle involved had now passed out of its period of suspension, the

appeal was "of academic interest only except possibly in relation to the appellant's record as an operator". The Tribunal said it was important for the operator's maintenance standards to be improved ••— the point which had led to the LA's a:ction -but recalled that Mr Richmond had blamed the troubles on his wife's death and his own ill health.


comments powered by Disqus