Senior traffic commissioner revises ‘O’ licence guidance 08 April 2014

Senior traffic commissioner Beverley Bell has warned operators in specialist industries that they could lose their 'O' licences, if they attract multiple convictions.

At a recent public inquiry, Beverley Bell, who is also traffic commissioner for the North West of England, said the case had "shone a spotlight" on issues that arise when an operator is regularly prosecuted by an enforcement agency.

She concluded that it was no longer acceptable for operators to tell their local traffic commissioner they have been convicted and to "say nothing more".

Guidance issued by the previous senior traffic commissioner – that convictions of this nature would not lead to 'loss of repute' – sent out the wrong message, she said.

United Utilities Water was called to the public inquiry in question, which considered numerous prosecutions by the Environment Agency and Cumbria County Council between October 2009 and March 2013, with fines totalling over £600,000.

The company had notified the offences to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner, in line with requirements, but on many occasions did not provide details. The company had identified some offences as being of strict liability.

In a written decision issued after the hearing, Mrs Bell noted that the convictions did not fall within the list of under Schedule 2, paragraph 5 of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995.

However, she added that Schedule 3, paragraph 1(2) requires a traffic commissioner, when considering repute, to have regard to all material evidence including, in particular, any other information as to previous conduct.

Mrs Bell added that it will now be incumbent on operators in these industries not only to notify the conviction itself but also to provide a "full and detailed explanation" of the circumstances of the offence(s) and of subsequent remedial action.

Ruling that it would be manifestly unfair to reach a decision of loss of repute for United Utilities Water, in view of the previous senior traffic commissioner's policy, Mrs Bell offered further guidance to operators in specialist industries who require a commercial vehicle licence.

"Operators in this situation would be well advised to make contingency plans in the event of a loss of repute," commented Mrs Bell.

"I make it clear that, if United Utilities wishes to form a separate subsidiary company that has as its sole purpose the provision of transport for United Utilities in connection with its trade or business, then that would be an acceptable solution," she continued.

"The benefit of such an approach would be to separate the transport activities of the subsidiary company from the main company – which would allow the transport operating company to focus solely on its transport activities and thereby achieve proper compliance."

The Traffic Commissioner also issued a formal warning to United Utilities Water and asked the DVSA (Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency) to conduct further investigations.

Author
Brian Tinham

Related Companies
Department for Transport

This material is protected by MA Business copyright
See Terms and Conditions.
One-off usage is permitted but bulk copying is not.
For multiple copies contact the sales team.