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 
PI CASE FOUR
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Tribunal dismisses owner-driver's appeal
AN OWNER-DRIVER who failed to pay his renewal fee has lost his appeal before the Transport Tribunal against the termination of his one-vehicle licence.
Surrey-based David Coilingwood, trading as Construction & Demolition Services, had elected to pay the fee annually on 30 June each year. In 2007 he failed to make the payment in time and wrote to say he had mistakenly sent the cheque to the Eastbourne Traffic Area Office (TAO) instead of Leeds. His explanation was accepted and the licence continued in force.
In May 2008 a reminder was sent to Collingwood's correspondence address in Mitcham. That was returned with a note that the addressee had gone away. The fee was not paid and the licence was terminated. In July Collingwood applied to have it reinstated, saying he had not received any reminders and that in March he had notified Leeds that he had changed his address to Betchworth.
South-Eastern & Metropc tan Traffic Commissioner Philip Brown considered that exceptional circumstances had not been in play and refused to reinstate the licence.
Before the Transport Tribunal, Tun Nesbitt, for Collingwood, referred to previous appeal decisions and argued that this was another case where the TAO had been at fault. Collingwood expected that reminders would be sent but none were received.
Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said Collingwood had a warning in 2007 of the need to be vigilant. It was he who changed his address in 2008 and there was no evidence the TAO received his notification.