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
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198 
No return for company which "took risk"
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN EAST LONDON company which risked using an unlicensed HGV when its van broke down has failed to win the impounded vehicle's return.
Tayfur had applied to South Eastern & Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Christopher Heaps for the vehicle's return.The company admitted that it had taken a risk.
It told the TC that it was a small company and without the vehicle, which was its only asset, it would go bankrupt or simply cease to exist. 0-licence forms had been prepared, but they had been waiting to organise the finance side before sending them in.
The company knew that it had broken the law, but said it did not realise that the vehicle would be confiscated.
TheTC heard that the vehicle had been impounded on 9 June at the Rose bery Industrial Park, North London, while carrying food and drink. It was being driven by Dundar Moustafa, whose wife was the director of the company and whose sister was the company secretary.
Moustafa had told the traffic examiner that the company had applied for an 0-licence, but the application had been refused due to a lack of funds.
Last October the company had been convicted by Barking magistrates of the unauthorised use of a goods vehicle; it was fined £300.
Refusing to return the vehicle, the TC remarked that the company had been aware that it was using the vehicle without licence authority.