AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

IC is directed to reconsider

11th March 1999, Page 21
11th March 1999
Page 21
Page 21, 11th March 1999 — IC is directed to reconsider
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?

The Transport Tribunal has directed South Eastern es Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Brigadier Michael Turner to reconsider his recent curtailment of APPS's Operators Licence.

The Rainham-based firm, which specialises in runs to Turkey, had its licence cut from seven vehicles and seven trailers to three vehicles and three trailers after its application for 23 additional vehicles was opposed by the Metropolitan Police. The police cited an examination of its tachograph charts which had shown centre

and mode switch infringements and numerous drivers' hours offences.

APPS had been running 20 extra vehicles under interim authority; as well as curtailing the company's licence the IC had refused its licence variation application.

The company complained to the tribunal that the IC had not raised the question of the financial effect of curtailing its licence, and this left it unable to make any representations about this problem.

The tribunal also ruled that the IC should not have made the curtailment take effect immedi

ately without finding out what practical difficulties might arise with vehicles out of the country on their

way to and from Turkey.

And, following the Scottish Court of Session's decision in the Thomas Muir (Haulage) case, the IC was obliged to consider if the public interest was best served by disciplinary action in addition to refusing the licence variation.

The tribunal disagreed with arguments that the tachograph infringements were of minimal importance. Numerous drivers' hours supported had

been disclosed, and the tribunal endorsed the IC's view of the risk to public safety.

But it did not feel that the required balancing exercise had been undertaken. The IC had made no findings on the likely effect of the remedial measures the company was said to have taken. Nor had he explained the logic behind his conclusion that the company could not be allowed to operate more than three vehicles.


comments powered by Disqus