[2024] UKUT 312 (AAC)

The PO disregarded the ‘French’ offences on the basis of when they occurred and the Appellant’s denial of one of those offences. He was of the view that the number of MSIs, VSI, offences and the unsatisfactory outcome unsatisfactory outcome of the DVA Audit and Assessment left him in no doubt that the operator had failed to comply with the undertakings on his licence to keep vehicles fit and serviceable, to maintain proper records, to operate an effective driver defect reporting system and to observe the rules on drivers’ hours and tachograph etc. records.

The PO found the evidence of the operator be ‘…unsatisfactory and his attitude to compliance lackadaisical and worrying’ and gave numerous examples as a basis for this conclusion. The PO did not accept the Appellant’s evidence concerning the absence of complete records for the DVA audit and, in particular, his assertion that the Examiner had refused to download documents from a ‘firestick’. The PO concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding that there was an absence of ‘… any kind of monitoring, management and auditing.’ This was compounded by the conviction of the Appellant in 2022 for failing to download data. The PO gave further examples of the ‘… operator/transport manager’s lack of genuine commitment to compliance.’

The PO found the operator’s evidence of knowledge of the MSIs to be ‘vague and unsatisfactory’ and gave examples which, he asserted, corroborated such a finding. In conclusion, the PO stated: