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 
Illegal cabotage does not cost good repute
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Repute is retained despite three 11111511111M0' vehicles and a trailer having been used on illegal cabotage operations.
NO ACTION HAS been taken against the licences held by Aberdeen-based Davidson & Wilson Ltd and one of its directors, Ian Wilson, trading as Paddy Wilson Transport, after Scottish Deputy TrafficCommissionerRichard McFarlane concluded they had not lost their repute.
The two had been called before the DTC as a result of his refusal to return three vehicles and a trailer to associated company Davidson & Wilson BV, based in Hillegon, Netherlands. These had been impounded after he concluded they were engaged on illegal cabotage operations.
The DTC was satisfied that the Dutch company had been brought into being to circumvent the UK 0-licensing system ('No return of vehicles used in illegal cabotage operations', CM 28 June 2007).
For both operators, Christobel Hallas said it was Wilson's intention to carry on the business under the British company's licence. The lorries were now back in the UK working under the authority of the British company's licence.
Wilson said that after receiving a letter from Vosa in December 2006 alleging that the Dutch company might be operating in breach of the cabotage regulations, he was advised by Dutch and Scottish lawyers that the cabotage operations which the Dutch company was engaged in were legal.
Vosa was asked for a meeting to discuss the situation, but there was no response. At the time of the impounding hearing, the Dutch firm had ceased operation and the vehicles had been transferred to the British company's licence.
The DTC said he had no doubt that legal advice was sought, but it did not provide an answer if, as it turned out in the impounding case, the result was contrary to that advice. He would have been justified in holding that the company and Wilson had lost their good repute. However, he was concerned that a year had elapsed between the commencement of the impounding hearing and the present proceedings. He could see no reason why both issues could not have been considered at the same public inquiry.
He did not lose sight of the fact that the operations of the Dutch and British companies and Paddy Wilson Transport were essentially the operations of Wilson and that three vehicles and two trailers had been lawfully detained. Presumably, he added, there had been a significant financial loss as a result.
Taking into account all of the circumstances, the DTC said he was not prepared to make a finding that these two licence holders were no longer of good repute.
He warned Wilson about his future conduct as an operator, either as a sole trader or indirectly as a director of a limited company. •