Dowsett found not guilty
Page 14
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A driver, who hired his vehicle to his employer Hallett Silbermann, which specified it on its 0-licence, has been found not guilty of using it without an Operator's Licence.
Timothy Townsend, prosecuting before Dover magistrates, said that an artic in Hallett Silbermann livery, and driven by Neil Dowsett of Yiewsley, Middlesex, had been stopped in a check. The 0-licence identity disc was in the name of the Brent Group of Companies, the parent of Hallett Silbermann. Dowsett had told the traffic examiner that he owned the vehicle although he was not the registered keeper. He had denied that he was an ownerdriver, saying he was employed by Hallett Silbermann. He admitted that he was paid according to the work the vehicle did.
Townsend said that all the work was provided by Hallett Silbermann, but Dowsett paid all the expenses relating to the vehicle, such as road tax, fuel and maintenance costs.
He maintained that Dowsett was the "user" of the vehicle, and should therefore hold an 0licence. The "user" was defined in law as the driver, if the vehicle belonged to him or was in his possession under an agreement for hire, hire purchase or loan.
Dowsett said that he used to have a licence of his own. He bought the vehicle from Hallett Silbermann in the early 1980s. About eight years ago he wanted to do Continental work. He did not have any permits, and as running a business was more dif ficult than he had thought, he decided to go back and work for Hallett Silbermann. He did not want to lose on his vehicle so he entered a hire agreement with Hallett Silbermann. He usually drove the vehicle himself, but there were occasions when it was driven by other Hallett Silbermann employees. Dowsett also drove other Hallett Silbermann vehicles.
Stephen Kirkbright, defending, pointed out that there was a distinction between "belonging" and "owned" in the Transport Act.