The Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s Decision
The Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s Decision
The DTC found as follows:
My reason for rejecting the application is that at the previous Public Inquiry the Traffic Commissioner had considered, but refrained from finding that the Partnership and Mr Craig as Transport Manager had lost their repute. The Traffic Commissioner had told the Partnership and Mr Craig what they would need to do if they wanted to make an application in the future:-
“…you will need to appear before a Traffic Commissioner and satisfy her that your skills and knowledge are up to date and that you are able, and willing, to comply at all times with the undertakings on any future licence.”
The Partnership, and in particular, Mr Craig have failed to satisfy me of these requirements.
Mr Craig seems to fail to understand that the reason that the Partnership’s previous licence was put at risk was because it failed to produce evidence of satisfactory systems to the DVSA. The Traffic Commissioner had been critical of the failure of the Partnership to produce any evidence of satisfactory systems at the first Public Inquiry. It is remarkable that Mr Craig could have thought that the failure to provide evidence that the Partnership would have satisfactory systems in place would be acceptable at this Public Inquiry.
It is remarkable that Mr Craig, having been told at the first Public Inquiry that the Traffic Commissioner had serious concerns about his knowledge and understanding of the rules relating to driver’s hours, has done nothing since to improve his knowledge and understanding. This appears to me to be evidence that Mr Craig does not understand the importance of (1) correcting the deficiencies in his knowledge of driver’s hours and (2) keeping up to date with the requirements of operating goods vehicles.
I am not satisfied that the Partnership is fit to hold an operator’s licence under s.13B of the Goods Vehicle (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995. I did consider whether or not Mr Craig’s attitude meant that I should make a positive finding that the Partnership was unfit to hold a restricted licence, however, with some hesitation, I have decided not to do so.
I am not satisfied that in terms of s.13C of Goods Vehicle (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995 there are satisfactory arrangements for ensuring compliance with the drivers’ hours rules and regulations, nor that there are satisfactory facilities and arrangements for maintaining the vehicles used under the licence in a fit and serviceable condition.
![[2023] UKUT 210 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png)