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
137
138
139
140 
IC revokes Dukes' 0-licencc and slams 'ineffective' Es
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• by Mike Jewell Dukes Transport (Craigavon) and its joint managing direators have been banned from holding an 0-licence in any British traffic area for 10 years. Scottish Traffic Commissioner Michael Betts has also disqualified the firm's other directors from holding 0-licences for periods ranging from two to six years.
The company plans to appeal against the decision to the Transport Tribunal; it is understood to be applying for interim authority until the appeal is heard. But if the ban is upheld Dukes' licences in the Scottish, Eastern, North Eastern and North Western Traffic Areas will all be revoked.
Betts takes this case so seriously that he has ordered that a copy of his decision be sent to the Licensing Authority in Northern Ireland with a request for the LA to consider action against Dukes' 0-licence in the Province. In his view it would be a travesty if Dukes were allowed to continue to trade in Great Britain under the auspices of another licence.
Betts concluded that Dukes was no longer of good repute after 42 of its drivers were convicted of 17B offences of falsifying tachograph records.
Disqualifying the company and joint managing directors Ronald and Winston Duke for 10 years, with effect from 24 November, the IC said a large number of its drivers had behaved like an undisciplined rabble and many of the company's control mechanisms were nothing but a shambles.
It was not enough for directors to sit in isolation, he added; they had a duty to be proactive and to maintain the appropriate checks and balances. They had failed to take any meaningful disciplinary action against the people they had readily blamed.
Betts said he was aware that some drivers were already being vilified for speaking out but it was the managing directors' weak and ineffective control which was really to blame. Operations director C Diamond was disqualified for six ye, Betts said he had failed to ensure that depot managers were doing their properly and that there were efFec systems in place to ensure the comp followed the 0-licence regulations.
According to the IC, Diamond had t left without any direction from the be to investigate drivers who had been c victed, and to take disciplinary action.
Disqualifying the remaining direct M Duke, W Steele and T Kerr, for two ye, the IC said a board of directors sill operate like a cabinet and take j responsibility and decisions.