AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Application rejected

31st August 1989, Page 19
31st August 1989
Page 19
Page 19, 31st August 1989 — Application rejected
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• A Humberside ownerdriver, who lost his 0-licence last August after aeing convicted of theft of return loads has had his application for a new licence refused — despite a letter of support from his probation officer.

David Hague, trading as kuidtoft Traffic Services, of North Street, Crowle, Scunthorpe, had applied for a new national licence for two vehicles and trailers. In November 1987, he was convicted at Leeds Crown Court on two counts of theft and one of attempting to obtain property by deception, being sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.

North Eastern Deputy Licensing Authority George Smedley said that the offences arose out of the theft of return loads by Hague and a colleague. In revoking Hague's licence last August, Licensing Authority Frederick Whalley had said that he could re-apply when he felt that he had regained his reputation.

Smedley had a letter from Hague's probation officer saying Hague had satisfactorily completed six months parole and that he was impressed with his rehabilitation. The probation officer said he considered that Hague had sufficient repute.

Though he was reluctant to take anyone's living away, Smedley said he could not lightly give licences to people who had recently been to prison for an offence connected with haulage. It took years to live down a conviction for professional offences such as these. He was by no means convinced that Hague had "gone straight" for long enough to be sure that he was going to continue to "go straight" if given a licence.

Hague said that he was trying to make a go of everything. All he wanted was to get back to work.

Refusing to grant Hague a licence, Smedley said that he would regard three years after the date of conviction as the proper time for Hague to reapply. Though Hague had gone to prison, he was sure that he had not repaid the people he had robbed.

To that extent, he had not paid his debt to society.


comments powered by Disqus