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 
Katharine Oliver awaits ruling on disqualification
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
New hearing considers whether or not partnership fit to operate.
KATHARINE OLIVER, wife of disgraced haulier Stuart Oliver, and her parents, partners in Hexham-based JW Swan & Partners, must wait to learn whether they can continue to operate. Deputy Traffic Commissioner (DTC) Mark Hinchcliffe is reconsidering their possible disqualification from holding or obtaining an 0-licence in any Traffic Area as a result of an earlier hearing.
Katharine Oliver, and her mother Elsie Swan, won their appeals against initial indefinite disqualification by North Eastern Deputy Traffic Commissioner Beverley Bell in so far as the Transport Tilbunal directed that the matter be reconsidered by a different TC.
Stuart Oliver was one of two partners in William Martin Oliver & Partners given prison sentences for conspiracy to falsify tachograph records (CM 24 March 2005).
In December 2007, the DTC revoked the licence held by JW Swan & Partners, after ruling it had been used for the sole purpose of allowing vehicles that were previously operated by the Oliver's partnership to continue operation (CM 17 January 2008).
An investigation into the sighting of a vehicle with no 0-licence disc with a tank belonging to Kilfrost, one of Oliver's major customers, on 23 December 2007 by DTC Bell revealed a number of facts about the truck: the registered keeper was the Swan partnership, it was insured by the Swan partnership and it was on a finance agreement with Stuart Oliver.
As consequence, the DTC disqualified Katharine Oliver and her mother Elsie Swan (CM 19 June & 7 August 2008).
The Tribunal said that DTC Bell was a potential witness, which meant that she had no option other than to distance herself from the investigation, the preparation for the public inquiry (PI) and from conducting the PI itself (CM 2 October 2008).
When the case came before DTC Hinchcliffc, Katharine Oliver said that she had had nothing to do with the operation of that vehicle and she had been unaware of its operation. She agreed that at the time the vehicle was registered to and insured by the Swan Partnership. She said they had acquired that vehicle as the intention had been to apply for an increase in the number of vehicles. The income from that vehicle did not go to the Swan partnership. After the PI in December 2007, she told her husband to get rid of the vehicle. She had been unaware it had left the yard. It had been insured by her husband's broker and it was currently operating under an Irish licence. It was her husband the DTC should be talking to, not her. "You've got the wrong person sitting here," she added.
Asked whether the Swan partnership was a front, Katharine Oliver said she wondered how a two-vehicle licence could be a front for a 70-vehicle operation. It was a very low-key operation. The whole purpose had been to keep the warehouse side running. The Swan operation had nothing to do with William Martin Oliver.
The DTC will announce his decision in writing at a future date.