AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Licence given despite error

15th May 2003, Page 25
15th May 2003
Page 25
Page 25, 15th May 2003 — Licence given despite error
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?

A Taunton operator, who claimed to have inadvertently continued operating after his Operator's Licence had been revoked, has won his bid for a new licence.

Colin England, trading as Arrow Scaffolding, had applied for a two-vehicle restricted licence before the Western Traffic Commissioner Philip Brown.

Last December, the police stopped England. He was driving a vehicle that was displaying an expired 0-licence identity disc.

England admitted that he had been using the vehicle since November but maintained that he had submitted a licence application, supplying all the necessary information, and that he had understood that everything was being dean with.

"I believed I had the right to use the vehicle, but I now accept !did not," he said.

England added that he did not know if there was going to be any police action for unauthorised use but if there was, he would have to plead guilty. He had understood that he had an interim licence as he had paid the fee. He had not known of the licence revocation in 1996 as he had just let it run out.

For England, Paul Carless said that he had been honest and up-front, and wanted to start with a clean sheet. He would notify the TC about the possible prosecution one way or another.

Granting the licence subject to the production of three months' bank statements, the TC said that it appeared that an interim licence had not been granted in November "I believe you want to be in the system. Don't forget your undertakings. If you are in breach, you will be before me and you will lose your licence," he told England.

Tags