TC forced to revoke 0-licence
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• by Michael Jewell The first haulier to lose his Operator's Licence since changes to law governing good repute came into force could be the first of thousands.
Last week South Eastern & Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Michael Turner said the new rules required him to revoke the licence of Surrey haulier Thomas McHugh. Recent changes to Schedule 3 of the Goods Vehicle (Licensing of Operators) Act deleted the word "repeated". A haulier is now deemed to have lost his good repute if "convicted of road transport offences".
News of the revocation should send shock waves to every transport office around the country. McHugh had only been convicted of relatively minor offences—if the public inquiry had been held last year he would have kept his licence.
The inquiry heard that McHugh. who held a licence for eight vehicles based at Croydon, Shepperton and West Woking, had been convicted in November 1998 of the unauthorised use of a vehicle and a C&U offence: the unauthorised use of a vehicle in January 1999; and the unauthorised use of an operating centre and failing to produce tachograph records in July 1999.
During the course of the public inquiry the TC told McHugh that he was sorry the situation had arisen but he was left with nowhere to go. In the ordinary course of events he would not have been considering licence revocation. Revoking the licence on the grounds that McHugh had been "convicted of road transport offences", Brigadier Turner said the introduction of the new paragraph had caused a great deal of concern to Traffic Commissioners. "There would appear to be absolutely no discretion allowed a Traffic Commissioner in this matter." he said.
Though McHugh is to appeal to the Transport Tribunal against the TC's decision, his legal representative, Colin Ward, of Ward International Consulting, feels the prospects of success are slight, given the wording of the legislation.
Ward points out that even two convictions for absolute liability offences, such as overloading and other C&U offences where the operator might be blameless, could lead to a similar ruling being made if the wording is strictly interpreted.
Turner has directed that his decision should not take effect until the appeal has Peen heard, given the serious nature of the matter and the question of interpretation of Schedule 3.