A licence for life
Page 8
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
0 YOU have an operators licence! You may be an own-account (restricted) operator with 7,500 vehicles with your own legal department and with the self confidence that you are unassailable because you cannot possibly do anything wrong. On the other hand you may only have 150 vehicles and still feel immune. You could be just an average haulier with a Standard National Licence simply trying to make an honest buck and regulating your drivers and your tachos.
Whatever you are, big or small, if any of you think that in the duration of your licence you are immune, then I do not think you should have an operators licence at all, be it HGV or PSV.
Strong words, maybe, but in the past few months I have represented a large number of operators both big and small called to public inquiries. Some were for maintenance problems but, in the main, they were for environmental objections and representation against operating centres.
I find the level of comprehension in all sectors of the industry concerning the legislation that governs us to be appalling and this applies to managers and directors alike. When f usually make this observation I get the answer "Well, that's what we employ fellows like you for," but fellows like me are not around all the time and we are few on the ground. I recall an article written by Traffic Commissioner John Pugh for the Law Society "Gazette" in which he stated twice: "ht is noticeable that the number of lawyers who have acquainted themselves with the legislation to advise their clients is comparatively few."
When so much is at risk it seems foolish to put the future of your operations into the hands of unskilled managers and, even worse, unskilled advocates? A very noteworthy speaker recently said: "If you think training is expensive, try ignorance!"
Now try this one. If you think knowledge of legislation is expensive, try prosecution! It happens to all operators as the recent press has made abundantly clear.
Ignorance is often passed off by senior management with: "Why didn't you know that?" or "That's what I pay you for'?" Sound familiar'? The ultimate shame for the industry is that the driver suffers the brunt of it all the criticism, the sarcasm, the eventual humiliation of no support.
In my previous articles I have written about the courts and the Licensing Authorities but what happens when one offence leads to the situation where both are involved? If an operator is convicted of defective brakes, for example, in a Magistrates Court, the Licensing Authority can then call him to a public inquiry to examine him for good repute that he is a fit and proper person able to maintain his vehicles to the required standard. Is this double jeopardy? Should you expect "British Law" to be this way?
The answer has to be "yes" while we, as an industry, accept judgment on us by those who are unqualified. The Licensing Authorities are qualified and so they must be the ultimate decision makers and, importantly, their method of achieving "justice" is more morally acceptable than are Magistrates Courts. I and many colleagues were not happy with many of the proposals put forward in the recent "Palmer Report" concerning the present licensing system because we are of the belief that to erode or change the present "hands on" approach adopted by the Licensing Authorities will ultimately result in a sudden deterioration in enforcement and the industry will be at the total mercy of those unqualified.
The first concern of the Licensing Authorities is that of road safety. But since 1984 environmental considerations have placed a greater burden on their shoulders.
There are three main areas under which the Licensing Authority will call public enquiries. In order of priority but not necessarily quality they are: 1. Maintenance 2. Convictions 3. Environmental.
Category 3 often seems to make up the largest number of public inquiries and, in most cases, they seem to take the longest time. Maintenance public inquiries usually come about from an operator collecting Prohibition and Defect Notices or from an adverse report from the Vehicle Examiner following a fleet inspection.
Finance plays an important part in the deliberations of the Licensing Authority when maintenance is in question. If you skimp on safety inspections or fail to operate planned preventative maintenance then your credibility is in question. Defect reporting systems have to be in place and it is not good enough nowadays simply to have a defect book in the traffic office, every vehicle shouid have one and drivers should be trained so that they are aware of how to use them.
If you do not keep the records of maintenance and safety inspections, rigidly adhering to the declaration made on your application, then you have no evidence in your favour.
What is preventative maintenance? My answer is always replacement or overhaul of any item before the end of its expected service life whether required or not and, further, the inspection of those items that are known to be unreliable.
The Licensing Authorities like to see this and will give due credit.
At most public inquiries on maintenance a Vehicle Examiner will be there to give evidence and he should be cross-examined to establish the seriousness of the problem. Unchallenged, his evidence carries a great deal of weight.
There are some convictions which immediately bring the question of your good repute into account and these are normally where licences are revoked. Evasion of Excise duty and falsification of tachographs are two examples. Complacency over convictions lead to complacency over authority. The licensing system is not going to alter greatly in the forseeable future so education of those responsible for compliance is essential.
Environmental public enquiries are often the most emotive with representors (Joe Public) and objectors (councils, police, highways and so on). Operating centres that are not sensitive are becoming rare and those placed (unfortunately) in the Green Belt areas such as Surrey and the Dales are bound to end up with representation and objection to a grant, renewal or variation application. It is here where the experienced advocate comes into his own.
The Transport Tribunal has, in the main, directed the Licensing Authorities in their interpretation of the environmental parts of the 1968 Act, as amended, and along the way it had caused some confusion but, generally, it is understood who and what can make representations or objections.
Operator's Licences will never be "licences for life" there are too many potholes and no operator is iiiimune. But it helps greatly if the superior of your company is great in knowledge.