Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal dismisses owner-driver's appeal

16th June 2005, Page 39
16th June 2005
Page 39
Page 39, 16th June 2005 — Tribunal dismisses owner-driver's appeal
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?

THE TRANSPORT Tribunal has upheld a decision to revoke the one-vehicle licence of an operator who ignored repeated requests for information from the Traffic Area Office.

The licence held by Samuel Lean,trading as Budget Skip Hire, of Small Dole, West Sussex, was originally revoked by the South Eastern & Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Christopher Heaps at the end of 2004.

The Tribunal said that in July 2004 a vehicle in Lean's livery was seen by a traffic examiner displaying an 0-licence disc in his name, but no excise licence. The driver, Nelson Ray, said he had purchased the vehicle from Lean and was using it privately. Four days later a different vehicle was seen returning a skip to Small Dole and was given an immediate prohibition for a damaged tyre. When Lean was visited by a vehicle examiner only one inspection sheet and one defect report could be produced.

In August and September the TAO wrote to Lean at Shooting Field, Steyning. without receiving any reply. On 29 September a vehicle in Lean's livery, not displaying a valid excise licence, was followed into Small Dole. The vehicle, driven by Lean, was given a prohibition for a defective tachograph.

Lean told the traffic examiner he could be con tacted at Pound Lane, Upper Beeding, and the correspondence address was still Shooting Field.

In October and November the TAO wrote to the Pound Lane address, setting out the history and requesting financial information. The letters warned revocation might be ordered. No reply was received and the TC revoked the licence.

On appeal,it was said Lean parted from his wife and the Shooting Field address was the matrimonial home. The Traffic Area was notified of a change of address in August. Lean did not deny that in September he told the TAO he could be contacted at Pound Lane.

Dismissing the appeal the Tribunal said the TAO and the TC had acted reasonably throughout.

comments powered by Disqus