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
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212 
TC brands Transconsult boss 'cavalier' and 'self-promoting'
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Transconsult is once again at loggerheads with a Traffic Commissioner
following a decision in the North-West Traffic Area Mike Jewell reports.
CONTROVERSIAL transport consultancy firm Transconsult and its boss Alec Hayden have suffered another kick in the teeth as a Traffic Commissioner scorned Hayden's word as "meaningless".
His long-running row with the TCs, whom he accuses of acting outside their authori ty, has centred on Transconsult's provision of CPC holders who are on more than one 0-licence and are not directly paid by the operators.
Hayden argues that this is allowed under EU transport law.
However, ruling after ruling has gone against the firm.
The latest setback has come at the hands of North-Western TC Beverley Bell, who says: • She is no longer prepared to accept Alec Hayden or anyone else from Transconsult as an authorised signatory on licence applications or any documents in the North-Western Traffic Area.
• Applications for licences, variations or change of transport manager where Transconsult are involved must be referred to her and will not be dealt with under delegated authority.
• Such applications must be dealt with at public inquiry, and applications involvingAlec Hayden will be unlikely tosucceed although each case will be dealt with on its merits.
The comments came in the written decision on three NorthWest operators, who all used David Peacock as their transport manager. He was supplied by Transconsult but also worked 40 hours a week for the Royal Mail.
Bell gave the three operators time to find new transport managers after ruling that their best interests had not been served at the previous public inquiry (CM 9 March 2006). She added that the case could have been prejudiced against them by the behaviour of Alec Hayden and of Gerald Hamilton. who represented them.
In all three cases, the TC was satisfied that the operators had been misled by the activities of Alec Hayden and David Peacock, and that they did not know their 0-licences were in jeopardy.
Broken promise
During the hearing. Hayden admitted breaking a promise to the TC that Transconsult would alter its contracts so the transport managers it supplied would be paid directly by the operators (CM 9 March).
The TC said that it was on this basis alone that she had agreed to allow Hayden to act as a consultant for operators. She would not have countenanced any other arrangement. When she told Hayden that he appeared to have reneged on their agreement. he agreed that he had done so without any reference to her.
She remarked that this approach was typical of Hayden, in that he claimed to be passionate about the safe operation of vehicles,but chose to confront the licensing regime or to undermine it at every opportunity. Bell said he had even suggested that a perfectly legitimate call-up letter was a deliberate attempt to cause fear and confusion.
The TC remarked that Hayden displayed a -cavalier disregard" for the licensing regime by allowing operator applicants to sign
blank forms and then took no steps to remedy the situation by sending a copy of the completed document to the operator. When he was confronted with those matters he defended himself by attacking the very legislation, and the TC's interpretation of that legislation, that he said he wanted to work within, she added.
Not to be trusted
Bell concluded that Hayden's word was meaningless, that he was not to be trusted and that his sole intention was self-promotion rather than the promotion of his client operators' interests.
Bell also expressed concern over Hamilton's conduct. She was satisfied that he was not representing his three clients to the best of his ability but was there with the sole intention of protectingTransconsult and Alec Hayden's position.
Bell concluded that she would not permit Hamilton to appear before her in any public inquiry proceedings in the future.
This was because she could not be satisfied that he would put his clients' interests first if Transconsult or Alec Hayden were involved or that he would observe or even understand the spirit, if not the minute detail, of the rules governing professional conduct.
Hayden plans to appeal to the Transport Tribunal.