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 
Tribunal upholds ruling banning artics from site
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A plant hire firm has the TC's decision to ban artics from its site
confirmed by the Transport Tribunal.
THE TRANSPORT Tribunal has upheld a TC's refusal to allow artics to use an operating centre because their movements in and out of the site would he "inherently dangerous".
As a result T&M Plant Hire lost its appeal against the refusal of South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Christopher Heaps to allow it to operate trailers from a site in Honey, Surrey.
TheTribunal ruled that road safety issues are relevant when considering the suitability of an operating centre. It also ruled that a TC has the power to attach conditions to a licence which prevent vehicles from causing danger at the point where they join a public highway.
In April 2002 the TC had refused T&M's application for a licence for six vehicles and four trailers based at the site on road safety grounds. Following a site visit the TC concluded that the movement of artics into and out of the site was inherently dangerous.
He found that artics could not enter or leave the access road without taking up almost the whole of its width and the whole width of the main road.
Last May the company applied to base three vehicles and one trailer at the site. The TC granted that application for three vehicles only, ruling that no trailers could be operated from the site. Appealing against that decision, Robert Locke, for the company. said the TC's concerns were perceived rather than actual as there had been no accidents at the junction of the private access road with the main road.
The company's inability to operate trailers from the site was causing severe difficulty, he explained, as it had to bring an artic from its Betchworth depot to move large items of equipment and it had been necessary to find alternative storage for its trailers.
Rejected appeal
Locke maintained that the TC had been wrong to reject a proposed condition that vehicles only turn right in and out of the access road as this would minimise the risks involved in using the junction. He claimed that this was an unreasonable restriction on a company which could not viably subcontract its haulage.
The Tribunal rejected this argument, commenting that the TC's decision in 2002 was largely based on his own observations which were not challenged at the time. Neither was that decision appealed.
There had been no subsequent material change that would lead the TC to reconsider his previous findings. In the absence of any fresh evidence the TC's refusal to impose the suggested condition was not plainly wrong. •