DTC considers repute is tarnished
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A bid for a new international licence by Paul Watkin, trading as Freightlines International of Barnsley, has been refused by North Fastern Deputy Traffic Commissioner Brian Homer who considers Watkins repute as tarnished. Watkin, who was seeking authority to operate two vehicles and two trailers, has been operating under interim authority since October 1992.
DOT vehicle examiner Brian Eden said that in June one of Watkin's vehicles was given an immediate prohibition for three defects Two cheques paying for test fees were returned both • tests were later paid for in cask Fellow traffic examiner Anne Devlin said Watkin had admitted using vehicles without Hance authority vehicle excise licences or test certificates. A vehicle destroyed in an accident in May had no test certificate and the excise licence had expired last November. Another vehicle travelled 14,000 miles when out of test and another 9,000 miles untaxed.
Watkin said he operated as Paul's Transport from 1981 until October 1'. He then worked as a driver before starting Freightlines. He had been working for a firm in Newhaven. All went well at first, then in April payments became erratic and his financial position gradually worsened. He was now working for another firm, who paid at the end of each job, and the position was improving He agreed he had failed to declare convictions for handling two stolen vehicles, using vehicles with defective tyres and for the unlawful deposit of controlled waste. He agreed that his previous licence had been revoked.
It had never been his intention not to pay vehicle excise duty said Watkin He had always informed the MIA himself and paid the back duty He had told them that he had operated an untaxed vehicle in May and June and they had sent him a bill for that.
The vehicle and trailer were written off in May when the driver forgot to turn on the air line for the service brake.
After Watkin had said he was disputing the bill for the vehicles recovery, Homer commented that if it was taken to court it could wipe out the available capital.
Refusing the application, Horner said he did so because he was not satisfied about Watkins competence. He did not feel the financial information produced told the whole story Homer also said had considerable doubts that Watkin had the finance to operate two vehicles and trailers and was concerned that maintenance appeared to have been on a "hit or miss" basis.