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 
Operators wife named on licence for tax reasons'
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Transport Tribunal has upheld the decision of Eastern Traffic Commissioner Geoffrey Simms to revoke the 0-licence held by Chelmsford-based Philip and Eileen Gilliar, and to disqualify them from holding an 0licence indefinitely.
The partners had held a licence for two vehicles and one trailer, with one vehicle and one trailer specified. They had been called before the TC because of concerns over maintenance, repute, finance and professional competence.
The IC had heard that a vehicle examiner had been unable to examine the vehicle as it was out of the country, and that Philip Gilliar had not got round to taking his CPC examination since sacking his transport manager in 1999.
Gilliar said that the vehicle "tramped" from one place to another, frequently to Greece, and was rarely in one place for any length of time. It had recently passed its annual test so he had not thought the VI inspection was necessary.
He did not have driver Or tachograph records available as they were kept in the cab. His son owned and drove the vehicle and parked where it suited him, with running repairs and servicing carried out by whoever was available at the time. His son had tried unsuccessfully to obtain a licence of his own.
Making the revocation and disqualification orders, the TC had described the operation as a "sham" which went "to the very heart of the licensing system." It had appeared to him that the Gilliars' son was the user of the vehicle and should hold the licence.
At the Tribunal, Gilliar challenged the disqualification of his wife, saying: "To ban my wife, knowing she runs a shop and has no part in the transport but is named for tax reasons only, is an infringement of her human rights." He thought that his wife had been disqualified to prevent him "going through the back door" and from starting up again in her name.
Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said that Gilliar had agreed with Simms that his wife was equally responsible for the licence. They considered that the TC had been entitled to come to the conclusions he had, and that this was an appropriate case for disqualification.