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 
Banned operator fails to get vehicle returned
Page 36
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A LANCASHIRE operator who had his licence revoked and was caught driving a few months later has lost his appeal to have his impounded vehicle returned — he denied he was driving for hire or reward at the time the unit was seized.
Brierfield-based Brian Nutter's licence was revoked by North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Patrick Mulvenna in October 2003 because of a poor maintenance record after he failed to turn up at a reconvened hearing. His laden vehicle was impounded in January after being seen by a traffic examiner while being driven by Nutter; deputyTC Tom Macartney later refused to return it (CM 25 March), Appearing before the Transport Tribunal, Nutter said the truck was a recovery vehicle used for the movement of scrapped cars. He was pestered by fly tippers in his scrap business, with household items being dumped at his premises and he had been obliged to use his vehicle to move such items on a few occasions.
He claimed it had been necessary to fill the load with more attractive goods such as scrap washing machines as an inducement to the tip to accept other items of scrap contained within the load, which had been fly tipped at the entrance to his premises. He had received no money for the load.
Dismissing the appeal,thellibunal agreed with the interpretation put on the facts by the DTC: namely that the vehicle was being used for hire or reward at the time of its detention.