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
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214 
Playing hard to get costs operator his licence
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE REVOCATION of a licence because of difficulties in contacting the operator at his given address has been upheld by the Transport Tribunal.
Woodbridge-based Peter Moyse failed to reply to a request for an explanation following a VI report raising concerns about maintenance. Following two reminders, Moyse telephoned to say he would reply as soon as possible. On 23 July 2004 he was sent a letter by first class post and recorded delivery. Moyse claimed to have replied, hut the TrafficArea Office said no reply was received.
TheTA0 wrote again on 18 October,saying the licence had been revoked. That prompted a response from Moyse's wife, who said the required information had been provided in the letter sent in July, a copy of which she enclosed. The case was referred to the Eastern Traffic Conunissioner, Geoffrey Simms, for reconsideration. He decided that the licence should remain revoked.
The tribunal said the TC was entitled to conclude that he was dealing with an operator who did not respond promptly and reliably to communications from his off ice. It had been argued that Moyse had not changed his address so remained contactable. If "contactable" had the limited meaning that letters sent to Moyse's address would reach him, that was correct. However, in the tribunal's view "contactable" here had a much wider meaning because contact between the TC and operator meant the operator must respond promptly, effectively and reliably to communications from the TC and his office.