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
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198 
Breathing space for revoked operator
Page 32
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN I I -TRUCK operation has won a two-month breathing space from revocation to allow a new licence application to go ahead. Its director blamed a postal mix-up for having lost touch with the Traffic Area Office.
The Transport Tribunal dismissed an appeal by Colnbrook, West London-based Jason McNamara against the revocation of his licence by the Western TC, but decided that the revocation should not take effect until 1 April to give him time to apply for a fresh licence.
A cheque for the renewal fee was returned unpaid in May. The Traffic Area Office wrote to McNamara asking for an explanation and a replacement cheque, but there was no reply to that or to further requests.
The licence was revoked in August. In September McNamara wrote to the TAO, saying he had not received any correspondence until 15 September as he operated from a shared site where all the post was delivered to the front office without being sorted.
Appearing before the Tribunal. McNamara said he had obtained the relevant correspondence from the office of another company. Personal problems had prevented him taking a full interest in the business until September.
Dismissing the appeal. the Tribunal said TCs were entitled to assume, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that letters sent to an operator's correspondence address had been received, even if there was no reply.Any other conclusion would cause difficulty for TAOs as well as allowing unscrupulous operators to abuse a system based on trust.