AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Haulier loses appeal to increase licence Operator: Edwards Transport (Shropshire)

6th June 2013, Page 14
6th June 2013
Page 14
Page 14, 6th June 2013 — Haulier loses appeal to increase licence Operator: Edwards Transport (Shropshire)
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?

Matter: 0-licence law, operator appeal Hearing: London Appeal judge: Mark Hinchliffe TEMPERATURE-controlled haulier Edwards Transport (Shropshire) has lost an appeal against a deputy traffic commissioner's (TC) decision to stop it from adding another 15 vehicles and 30 trailers to its licence authorisation.

At a public inquiry in November 2012, Roger Seymour, deputy TC for the West Midlands, refused to grant an application from the firm to increase the authorised number of vehicles and trailers at its Market Drayton base from 32 to 47 vehicles, and from 40 to 70 trailers.

It followed complaints from local residents who said they had been affected by vehicle movements to and from the operating centre, as well as noise generated by maintenance activity, from refrigeration units and the vehicle wash.

Although the deputy TC said Edwards Transport was an operator who paid attention to the interests of its neighbours, he restricted the increase in authorisation to 34 vehicles, and 55 trailers, with a stipulation that no additional vehicle movements take place.

On appeal, Edwards Transport said the deputy TC had been wrong to base his findings on his personal impressions following a site visit, and had failed to consider whether further undertakings and conditions would minimise or alleviate disturbance.

However, following a hearing in London, upper tribunal judge Mark Hinchliffe dismissed the appeal saying predictions by Edwards Transport as to the likely number of movements to be made by additional authorised vehicles were "speculative".

Summing up The judge said the case for the full increase in vehicles and trailers needed to be supported by clear projections, preferably backed by objective records.


comments powered by Disqus