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
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210 
Licence revocation upheld
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Operator fails to win back 0-licence after Transport Tribunal dismisses her appeal saying that the outcome was inevitable.
THE REVOCATION of the 0-licence held by Diane Alexander, trading as Alexander Transport International of Mablethorpe, has been upheld by the Transport Tribunal. Her two-vehicle/two-trailer licence had been revoked by Eastern Deputy Traffic Commissioner Michael Guy.
The DTC had been told that she only had one artic on the road. In September 2003 prohibitions had been issued to the tractor for 17 defects and to the trailer for 15 defects, When presented for clearance the prohibition notices were varied. However, a maintenance investigation shortly before the public inquiry had proved satisfactory.
Failures
An examination of tachograph charts had revealed numerous offences, including exceeding 41/2-hours driving without the required break; exceeding the daily driving limit; taking insufficient daily rest; failures to properly record details. In addition, the speed limiter was not working.
The breaches had been committed by Alexander's husband, the main driver, and a second driver, Peter Mason.
When interviewed, Alexander had said she relied upon the drivers to observe the rules. She did not employ anyone to check the tachograph records.
Her transport manager was not expected to do that work and only checked the vehicle and service records.
Alexander was convicted of permitting a vehicle to be used with a defective speed limiter and she was fined £500 plus £85 costs.
Her husband had told the DTC that he had previously been an employed driver and his wife had decided to start up in business the previous year.
The vehicle had been bought in what they thought was a good condition and they assumed the speed limiter was working correctly.
Appearing before the Tribunal for Alexander, Chris Harris argued that the DTC had failed to consider an alternative to revocation. Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said the outcome was inevitable. Neither Alexander nor her husband had properly addressed the issue of the duties of the transport manager; they had not ensured that tachograph charts or drivers' hours were complied with.
The burden of proving compliance with an operator's obligations lay with the operator. The Tribunal's view of the matter was not altered by being told that Alexander intended to put her house in order by obtaining a CPC qualification..