[2025] UKUT 073 (AAC)

this argument is dealt with in paragraphs (2) and (4) above;

the Appellant must have been aware that his request to surrender his licence had not been accepted. As a licence-holder, he therefore remained required by regulation 25 of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Regulations 1995 to maintain an effective address for correspondence and, if the previously notified address ceased to be effective, provide the OTC with an alternative. The Appellant cannot realistically expect the Upper Tribunal, on appeal against a Traffic Commissioner’s regulatory decision, to be persuaded by an argument that relies on a licence-holder’s failure to comply with regulatory requirements;

there was evidence to support the Traffic Commissioner’s adverse findings against the Appellant, and it is referred to in numerous places in her reasons;

this argument assumes that it is accepted as fact that the Appellant transferred ownership of, or responsibility for, the vehicles at some point before 28 August 2023 but, as we have explained above, that assumption is not made out;