Case turns on call-up letter
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Transport Tribunal has upheld the revocation of the licence held by Bury St Edmunds-based Bryan J Nunn Haulage, and the disqualification of the company and its sole director Bryan Nunn from holding or obtaining an 0licence for five years.
Both orders were made by Eastern Traffic Commissioner Geoffrey Simms after the company used photocopied 0licence discs following a licence curtailment (CM 9-5 Sept 1999).
In October 1998 concern over the company's maintenance record led to a licence cut from 24 vehicles and 15 trailers to 10 vehicles and 10 trailers. In January 1999 one of the company's artics, which had been taken off the licence in October, was stopped in a weight check and found to have a counterfeit 0-licence disc. The company subsequently pleaded guilty to allowing a false 0licence disc to be used with intent to deceive and making a document resembling an 0licence disc with intent to deceive. It was fined £600 with £75 costs.
James Duckworth, for the company and Nunn. argued before the Tribunal that the call-up letter had referred only to convictions on the issue of repute. The convictions were in respect of one licence disc only whereas the TC had based his decision on the copying of three discs. Because of the terms of the call-up letter, the TC was not entitled to look at the full history.
Rejecting this argument, the Tribunal said that as copying additional discs had been introduced by Nunn, the TC was entitled to take account of their.
When interviewed under caution by the traffic examiner, Nunn had said he had copied more than one disc. It was also plain from the call-up letter that the full history was being relied upon, it being the same TC who had said less than a year before that he had revocation in mind.
Duckworth maintained the
TC had misunderstood the nature of the deception, which had been a photocopy of the original, whereas it appeared the TC thought green paper had been used. The Tribunal felt that was a detail and the TC had been entitled to conclude that it was a "calculated and quite substantial attempt to copy a disc".