Martin Jolly loses disqualification appeal
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Newton Stewart based Martin Jolly Transport has lost its appeal against the revocation of its licence and the disquahfication of its directors from holding an 0-licence.
Scottish Traffic Commissioner Michael Betts had revoked the 22-vehicle/22trailer licence after seven of the company's drivers, including managing director Martin Joily's son Lee, had been convicted of 21 offences of falsification while the firm was working as a subcontractor for Hayton Coulthard. They were fined a total of £5,250.
The TC had also disqualified Martin Jolly from holding an 0licence for three years arid his sons Tom and Lee Jolly for two years. He said he found it hard to believe that Jolly and his sons did not know of the widespread drivers hours abuse practised by its drivers on the Hayton Coulthard work. Martin Jolly Transport appealed to the Transport Tribunal, where Peter McCormack, for the company and its directors, argued that there was no evidence to support the finding that Martin Jolly knew what was going on.
But the Tribunal had previously warned that operators had to do more than set up adequate systems and then leave them to run themselves. What was required was constant supervision.
In this case, the Tribunal concluded, no proper arrangements had been made and this was indeed a bad case.
• A company formed by Martin Jolly's wife has won its bid for an 0-licence following an undertaking that her husband and two of her three stepsons would not become involved in the business in any way.
Calgow Transport had sought a new national licence for 15 vehicles and eight trail
ers based at the same operating centre as Martin Jolly Transport.
The TC said that on the surface Calgow Transport might appear to be a phoenix company launched to keep alive a revoked licence.
Roger Colledge, appearing for the company, denied this, saying the plan was to start with four vehicles and not to grow too big too soon. Asked about her experience in the fiercely competitive world of haulage, Anne Jolly said she had been around her husband's business for 15 years.
Asked why her third stepson, Jai Jolly had been made the other director when her husband and his other two sons had been disqualified from holding an 0-licence, Mrs Jolly said that he had had nothing to do with Martin Jolly Transport. He was only 19 but he had lived in a household where the talk was haulage. He was a qualified mechanic and his role would be to support her.
Asked what involvement her husband would have, Mrs Jolly replied: "Absolutely none. My husband and his two sons have their own business. I am totally my own person."
Asked why she was asking for 15 vehicles and eight trailers-15 vehicles having been specified on the Martin Jolly licence—Mrs Jolly said: "I would rather start small, but if I have the margin the world's my oyster." She told the TC
that she knew what her husband had done wrong and knew she could do a better job. The TC commented that she would have to.
Granting the application, but for only six vehicles and six trailers, the TC said he considered that Mrs Jolly had an extremely positive approach and he was prepared to give her a chance. He was granting the application for fewer vehicles than had been applied for to let things get started and to see how they were going.