AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Transline loses Driver thought fine was

13th January 2000
Page 27
Page 27, 13th January 2000 — Transline loses Driver thought fine was
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?

licence again

the end of the matter

Western Traffic • Commissioner

Christopher Heaps . has adjourned a driver's bid for an 0-licence so he can explain why he failed to declare a conviction for falsifying a tachograph record in his application form.

Peter Feszczak, trading as PEE, was seeking a licence for two vehicles and two trailers based at Spelthorne Commercials, London Road, Langley, Slough. His application was opposed by Slough Borough Council,

For Feszczak, David Harwood said he was currently in Australia. Two vehicles had been applied for in case he needed to hire in. Feszczak would he working with a tractor hauling trailers to Italy and Greece, Harwood added. He would be away for six days at a time. Spelthorne handled the maintenance and the tractor had to be parked somewhere.

Paul Kirby, of the borough council's traffic section, said a number of 0-licence applications had already been granted for this site and the council was concerned by the site's capacity for further vehicles. There were also environmental fears as the site was surrounded by homes. However, the council would not Oppose the parking of the tractor if hours restrictions were imposed.

Asked why Feszczak had failed to declare a conviction for making a false record, for which he had been fined 1200, Harwood said there was no answer. Feszczak had said it was a slip of the mind, and having paid the fine he had thought that was the end of it.

The TC commented that the question in the application form was quite plain —the allegation was that Feszczak had put a false name on a tacho chart. Harwood said it had not been done to hide anything. Feszczak had taken over a vehicle and the previous driver had left a chart in the tachograph which Feszczak had put h name on. There was no que tion of him having driven exce sive hours: it was more stup than fraudulent.

Indicating that if he did gra a licence it would be with houi restrictions and a parking Ix on trailers at the operating cei tre, Heaps said it was unsati factory that Feszczak had ni come to explain what only t could explain. The Appeal Cou had indicated that serious col sequences should follow whE licence application forms wei not completed properly.