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
191
192 
No return for truck loaned to an unlicensed operator
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A CARPET firm that was repeatedly warned about lending vehicles to an unlicensed haulier has failed to win the return of an impounded vehicle.
Refusing to return the truck, Scottish DeputyTraffic Commissioner Richard McFarlane warned that specifying a vehicle on a valid 0-licence does not allow it to be used by people not working for the licence holder.
Lark hall-based JEM Carpets had applied for the return of the vehicle at an Edinburgh public inquiry.
Traffic examiner Joseph Logan said he had stopped the vehicle in Glasgow. The driver was Robert McLellan, whom he had previously encountered driving another vehicle belonging toJEM Carpets.
The vehicle was displaying an expired 0-licence disc in JEM's name. McLellan said he had been told by his boss, furniture haulier John Smith, to say that the vehicle had an operator's licence. He believed the vehicle was owned byJ EM Carpets but he was driving it on Smith's behalf.
The vehicle was loaded with furniture for Smith's business. Smith paid for fuel and McLellan's wages.
Logan said he had phoned JEM's MD John Marshall to explain why the vehicle was being held. Marshall confirmed that he had previously been warned that lending a vehicle to Smith for use in his business was illegal.
McFarlane said the working relationship between Marshall and Smith was relaxed and it was very much a case of Marshall helping Smith out when required. He suspected this had been going on for some time.
The vehicle was clearly being used by Smith for his business although it was specified on JEM Carpets' licence. The difficulty for JEM Carpets was that at the time the company was not using the vehicle. Accordingly, its use by Smith, while being driven by McClelland, was unauthorised.
The DTC did not understand why Marshall lent the vehicle to Smith after he had been repeatedly warned that this practice was illegal and brought the risk of confiscation.