AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal backs revocation

19th March 1998, Page 20
19th March 1998
Page 20
Page 20, 19th March 1998 — Tribunal backs revocation
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Bournemouth based David 301 Power, trading as A2B Rubbish, has lost his appeal against the revocation of his Operator's Licence by Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Lester Madrell,

The Deputy TC had concluded there was too much risk to public safety to allow Power to continue.

He was particularly concerned about the issue of two immediate prohibition notices for a significant maintenance failure and an incident where an immediate prohibition was imposed after a vehicle was knowingly used with two defective tyres (CM 3-9 July 1997). The Deputy TC had granted a stay pending the outcome of Power's appeal after he had met a number of conditions Before the Transport Tribunal, Power pointed out the serious personal consequences for him and for his two employees if the revocation took effect. He said he now had a contract with a commercial garage to look after his lorries every two weeks. He stressed that he was not deliberately breaking the 0-licence rules.

Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said the Deputy TC had concluded that the risk to public safety was too great to allow the licence to continue. It was driven to the conclusion that the Deputy TC had reached the right decision, for the right reasons and in the right way.

Pointing out that Power had not been disqualified from holding a licence, the Tribunal said that if he was determined to stay in business and to obtain a fresh licence, he would be well advised to take advice from a body such as the Road Haulage Association or the Freight Transport Association. It would be surprised if such advice did not include the necessity for a formal maintenance contract in an approved form; a written drivers' defect reporting system in an approved form; evidence that the specified vehicle was still serviceable; and evidence that Power had a clear understanding of the basic requirements of the 0-licensing system.


comments powered by Disqus