AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal overturns revocation to give dairy second chance

2nd March 2006, Page 34
2nd March 2006
Page 34
Page 34, 2nd March 2006 — Tribunal overturns revocation to give dairy second chance
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 DAIRY FIRM with onc of the"worst"maintenance records a TC had seen has won its appeal against revocation. The Transport Tribunal ruled that more account should have been taken of the improvements the company had made.

The Tribunal quashed the revocation of the 41vehicle, five-trailer licence held by Acton, Londonbased Nijjar Dairies and the disqualification of the company and its directors from holding or obtaining an 0-licence in any traffic area for 12 months.

Instead, it directed that the licence be cut to 25 vehicles and four trailers, the minimum it had been told the company needed to stay in business.

In making the revocation and disqualification orders, the South-Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Christopher Heaps had said Nijjar's record of maintenance failings was one of the worst he had ever had to consider. He took account of breaches of drivers' hours and tachograph regulations and two convictions for allowing an unqualified driver to drive (CM 22 December 2005).

Before the Tribunal, James Backhouse argued for the company that the TC had failed to take into account the improvements made since May 2005 or the evidence of the vehicle and traffic examiners that was supportive of the company's efforts. It was the company's first public inquiry. There was undoubtedly incompetence but it was not deliberate. It was rare for a restricted licence holder to have its licence revoked in such circumstances.

The Tribunal said it agreed with the TC that this was a had case. However, it was remarkable that both the vehicle examiner and the traffic examiner took a favourable view of the company's future.They considered that theTC had been wrong to discount evidence showing it was unlikely that subcontractors could be used to keep the business going.

The Tribunal called for a further Vosa investigation in six to nine months, and emphasised that the company was unlikely to be given further chances.


comments powered by Disqus