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 
Dealer who was misinformed wins back his car transporter
Page 32
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A DEALER who claimed the Traffic Area Office told him he did not need an 0-licence for his car transporter has won the return of the vehicle after it was impounded.
North Wales-based Les Currie Garages satisfied Welsh Traffic Commissioner David Dixon that it was unaware it needed such a licence.
Traffic examiner Richard Mill said that in May he observed the vehicle, a two-axle rigid vehicle plus drawbar trailer designed to carry cars, at Ewloe carrying three cars and not displaying an 0-licence disc. He established that the company did not hold an 0licence and explained the need for one to the driver. He handed the driver a VI leaflet describing its impounding powers, which was passed on to managing director Leslie Currie.
On 7 June, the same vehicle driven by the same driver was observed at the same place carrying two vans. It was stopped, examined and given an immedi ate prohibition. On both occasions the vehicle was carrying unroadworthy cars and vans from storage to an auction site.
Currie said the company had held an 0-Licence for some years until mid-2003 when it was surrendered. That followed conversations at a car sale in Leominster with people in the trade,who told Currie that one wasn't necessary. He had then telephoned someone in the Traffic Area Office who had told him the same thing. His understanding from his driver's report in May was that an 0-licence was needed if more than two vehicles were carried.
The TC said there were three tests to be met for a recovery vehicle to avoid 0-licensing: the construction of the vehicle; the purpose for which it was used: and the number of vehicles carried.
He found that the company, in the person of Currie. did not know that the vehicle was being used unlawfully.