Inoperative suspension returns
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The suspension of seven vehicles 'rom the 50-vehicle licence held in the Eastern Traffic Area by Kelly Communications, which was never put into effect following a misunderstanding by the company, has been reinstated by Eastern Traffic Commissioner Geoffrey Simms.
The company appeared at a Cambridge public inquiry because of its failure to comply with the previous decision to suspend the vehicles for five days and because of a failure to declare convictions in its licence application form.
For the company, Jonathan Lawton said it had subsequently notified the three traffic areas in which it held licences of a variety of convictions, including fines of £8,000 at Croydon Magistrates Court for permitting hours offences and a fine of £2,760 at Bolton for a 7% overload.
Lawton argued that the TC should only take account of convictions recorded against the company in relation to the vehicles on its Eastern Area licence. He said it was impossible to understand the level of the overloading fine, and if the recent House of Lords decision in the case of Nuttall had been available at the time, the convictions at Croydon might not have occurred.
They had arisen because the drivers had recorded time on their timesheets which they had not in fact worked.
He added that the failure to implement the suspension order made at a previous public inquiry arose out of inaccurate advice given to the company.
Director Stephen Parry said that there had been a complete misunderstanding over the previous decision. The recent notification of the convictions had arisen out of the company's determination to obtain ISO 2000. The application form had been wrong. He accepted that either he or the company secretary had signed the form, but said he had relied on others to complete it accurately.
Assistant transport manager Dermot Coghlin apologised personally for the misleading information on the application form. In reply to the TC, he said it was difficult to explain his failure to see the need to supply that information.
Indicating that he was prepared to allow a retrospective compliance with the original decision, with a further two days' suspension of the seven vehicles concerned, the TC said he was satisfied that there had been no deliberate intention to conceal the convictions or mislead him.
He had been impressed by the steps taken by the company to prevent problems in the future.