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
191
192 
Extra trucks? No! Revocatioi
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Haulier loses licence after a string of offences. Mike Jewell reports.
AN APPLICATION for extra trucks on a licence led to a revocation when it was shown that the applicant was guilty of a string of offences, including operating for more than nine months without an effective transport manager and using an unauthorised operating centre. The company's maintenance arrangements had lapsed and there were other convictions.
Wayne Sabin, trading as WS Light Haulage. of Sheffield. had been called before North Eastern Traffic Cortunissioner Torn Macartney at a Leeds public inquiry.The TC was also considering an application to increase the licence authorisation from three vehicles to six.
Inspection periods varied
Macartney heard that inspection periods varied between two and six months. During a maintenance investigation in May a vehicle was given an immediate prohibition for a brake defect: a second vehicle was subsequently found to have a defective speed limiter. Sabin was fined £900 with £85 costs for using a vehicle with a defective speed limiter, failing to produce tachograph records and permitting a driver to fail to produce a record.
For Sabin, Dave Staniforth said that a little over a year ago the nominated transport manager fell ill. That coincided with the busi ness growing rapidly and Sabin had tried to do too much himself. His wife was taking the CPC exam.
The vast majority of Sabin's work was for Tinsley Wire, which required vehicles to be there through the night and in the early morning, so it was more convenient to park there rather than at the authorised operating centre. However, Sabin had now found a site next to Tinsley's premises.
Sabin said his transport manager. Thomas Walker, had visited him about every six weeks and he had paid him £100-fl 50 a month but he stopped paying him when he became ill.TheTC said this was not a good commercial arrangement but he felt that he should allow Sabin time to prove he was telling the truth. Asked if he was telling the truth. Sabin did not answer. Asked if he was refusing to answer. Sabin said he did not think he would be able to prove the arrangement as sometimes he had paid Walker in cash.
Macartney pointed out that if asked he would share information given at a public inquiry with the Inland Revenue and Customs.which could have serious consequences for the business.
No longer fit for the job
Walker said he had agreed to help Sabin set himself up. He had been quite involved for the first year but in the past six months he had hardly any involvement with the business as he had been recovering from a heart attack. He agreed that in his present state of health he was not fit to be a transport manager.
Revoking the licence, theTC said he considered that repute had been lost because Sabin had effectively operated without a transport manager for nine months. used an unauthorised operating centre, had convictions for tachograph offences and an axle overload, and used a vehicle with a defective speed limiter for more than three months.