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 
Advert leads honest ' operator astray
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A vehicle is returned to an operator who bought an 0-licence from a magazine ad.
A COMPANY which bought an international 0-licence through an advertisement has won the return of its impounded vehicle after its owner was able to convince the Traffic Commissioner that he believed he was operating legally.
South Eastern & Metropolitan TC Christopher Heaps was told that the vehicle was displaying an 0-licence disc in the name of another operator. When stopped, driver David Treloar a director of Dads Rentals, of Basildontold the traffic examiner that he was selfemployed and did not work for the company named on the licence disc.
Neither Treloar nor Dads Rentals held an 0-licence; the vehicle was detained on the grounds that the licence must be held by the person or company which uses the vehicle.
TheTC said that an application byTreloar for a licence for Dads Logistics had been turned down in July.
Treloar claimed he was operating the vehicle under the authority of the other operator's licence and Dads Rentals had subsequently applied for the release of the vehicle. He told the traffic examiner that he had bought the licence through an advertisement in a trade magazine for £3,000. After a year he would be required to pay a further £2,000 for the licence for the next 12 months. He produced correspondence with the seller of the licence a consultant trading as Transport Advisory Service dated 20 February, 4 March and 28 July 2004.
The letters included an EEC Authorisation permit, a copy of the 0-licence and a disc for Treloar's vehicle.
Treloar believed he could legitimately operate under a licence issued to another operator.
The advertisement offering the licence read: "Operators' Licences. National/International with permits available for immediate starts, CPC and operator centre included, one-off payment, also nationallintemational licences available on a monthly basis, deposit and monthly fee, no waiting, go straight to work, nationwide service. Transport Advisory UK."
Tough question The TC askedTreloar how he could believe that he thought he could operate on a purchased licence when he had previously applied for a licence in the name of one of his companies. Treloar said the licence application by Dads Logistics had been delayed by -problems with the operating centre", and the offer of immediate international work had led him to "purchase" the licence advertised. He said he had honestly believed that he could operate under the purchased licence.
Returning the vehicle, the TC said he was satisfied that Treloar had honestly believed he was authorised to operate the vehicle.
He warned that the transport press should be aware of the consequences of accepting advertisements similar to the one in this case. They could lead an operator to mistakenly operate while unauthorised, in sometimes unfair competition with authorised operators whose high standards are supported and commended by the editors of such magazines.
The TC called upon the editors of these magazines not to accept such advertisements. • • The advertisement referred to did appear in CM hut has now been withdrawn.