AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

The Transport Tribunal has given a West Midlands operator 14

5th August 1999, Page 21
5th August 1999
Page 21
Page 21, 5th August 1999 — The Transport Tribunal has given a West Midlands operator 14
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

days to produce a cheque book to the Traffic Area Office to prove that he had sent his licence renewal fee in time and that it had been lost in the post.

Richard Watson, trading as Chapel Roofing, of Solihull, had appealed against a ruling that terminated his licence because he had failed to pay the foe In time.

The Tribunal said Watson was sent a reminder to pay by 31 December 1998, but the fee was not received by the TAO by that date. In January Watson told the Traffic Area he sent a cheque on 28 December, but it hail not been cleared. lie was advised to send a fresh cheque with a copy of the counterfoil of the first one. Watson sent another cheque but there was no record that he had sent a copy of the counterfoil. The TAO had returned the cheque on the basis that the licence had terminated.

The TC had told Watson he was not prepared to accept his claim as he did not feel there were exceptional circumstances to justify overturning the automatic termination of the licence.

The Tribunal said it was the duty of an operator to ensure, by recorded-delivery post or otherwise, that his payment was received in time, It was easy to claim the payment had been lost in the post. Burt the Tribunal added that proof the original cheque had been filled out would support Watson's claim that it had been lost in the post— and this could amount to exceptional circumstances. With this in mind, a lot depended on the cheque counterfoil.

Watson had been unable to produce it to the Tribunal because, he said, it was with his accountant. If it had been shown the counterfoil it would have accepted there were exceptional circumstances and granted the appeal.


comments powered by Disqus