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 
Operating for six years without 0-licence
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A FURNITURE COMPANY operated for more than six years without an 0-licence because it believed it was running a showman's vehicle.
Its bid for an 0-licence has been adjourned to allow evidence from the traffic examiner, who took statements from the company's sole director.
Wrexham-based AcademyNet was seeking a new one-vehicle restricted licence before Welsh Deputy Traffic Commissioner Fiona Harrington.
For the company, Gerald Simpson, its non-executive financial adviser, said that he had nothing to do with the operation of the vehicle.
The company's sole director was out of the country The DTC said the principal concern was the operation of the vehicle without the authority of the 0-licence.
Simpson said that it had been run in that manner for the last six years and prior to him joining the company.
The company sold dining room furniture through exhibitions and shows. The vehicle was used solely to take demonstration stock to exhibitions and shows in the UK, Ireland and the Channel Islands.
The firm had been led to believe by director Edward Linton's previous business partners that it did not require an 0-licence, or need to use a tachograph, because it was transporting its own goods.
It had a showman's licence and insurance for the vehicle. It was not until the vehicle was stopped on the M25 last November that the company realised it needed an 0-licence. Vosa had not prosecuted the company after taking statements.
The DTC said that there was no prosecution as Vosa had run out of time.