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 
Licence revocation upheld over letters
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE REVOCATION at the end of October of the four-vehicle licence held by Rotherham,SYorks-based Jayne Farr on grounds of maintenance and finance has been upheld by the Transport Tribunal on appeal.
Because a cheque in payment of vehicle excise duty had been returned unpaid and marked "account closed" in May, the North-EastemTraffic Area Office wrote on four occasions requesting evidence of sufficient financial standing,both by first-class post and recorded delivery. In October, the TAO was alerted to the fact that there had been an unsatisfactory maintenance investigation in August. The delay in reporting it appeared to have been caused by Fares failure to respond to Vosa until 13 October.
Before the Tribunal,Farr said that the four haulage firms operating from the same site expected post to he delivered to a shared main office and when she asked, she was told there was no post for her. Th en in mid-August, a letterbox was found in the haulage yard full of mail addressed to her and others. Some of the letters had become so wet that they were unreadable.
The Tribunal said that did not explain the failure to reply to a letter sent in September. It was right for the TC to proceed on the basis that no reply had been received to the letters from the TAO and the failure to provide information could lead only to the conclusion that Farr no longer satisfied the financial requirement
Summary
KEEP IN TOUCH Operators must provide addresses at which communications from the Traffic Area Office will come to their attention and must reply to those communications within any time limit set by the TAOor, if there is none, within a reasonable time. The TAO is entitled to assume that if they write to the address or addresses given, the document will come to the attention of the operator.