New evidence in remittal
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• As reported briefly last week the case of Charles Scamp, in which the operator's one vehicle was curtailed by the South Eastern deputy LA for two months, has been remitted to the deputy LA by the Transport Tribunal, following appeal.
The appellant based in Faversham, applied last November to add one vehicle to his licence but just before the application an inspection resulted in an immediate GV9 being imposed on the one vehicle operating and it was also found that no inspection or drivers' records were available. In addition, it appeared that inspections were not being carried out.
At the application inquiry in April the LA also considered the case under Section 69. A vehicle examiner said that in December the vehicle was inspected and found to have six defects. Following the inspection the appellant made arrangements to have his vehicle serviced by a garage.
Not surprisingly, states the Tribunal, the deputy LA regarded the case as a serious one and he was fully justified in imposing a penalty on the appellant in respect of his past shortcomings.
When the appeal opened it became apparent to the Tribunal that it would be pointless to agree or disagree with the deputy LA's assessment of the future maintenance prospects for the vehicle because the original maintenance agreement had been terminated and arrangements with another garage, near base, had been made.
During the appeal hearing the Tribunal allowed the garage proprietor to give evidence as a witness and concluded that the new arrangements should be investigated. For this reason it was decided to remit the case to the deputy LA.