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 
Director's 0-licence is revoked for the second time
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A FOUR-TRUCK international operator has had its licence revoked after failing to attend a public inquiry to answer questions about a poor maintenance record and concerns about its financial standing.
Ambridge Services of Boroughbridge, w hich held an international licence for four vehicles and four trailers, had been called before North Eastern Traffic Commissioner Tom Macartney at a Leeds public inquiry. The company and its sole director and transport manager Edward Sadler were disqualified from holding or oh taming an 0-licence in any TrafficArea indefinitely.
Vehicle examiner Stewart Smith listed prohibitions imposed on the company's vehicles and trailers. He said the stated inspection period of six weeks was not being adhered to and the maintenance records and driver defect reporting system were unsatisfactory.
Pointing out that the financial evidence requested had not been submitted, the TC said that Sadler had been a director of AS International and Brighouse International Transport Services. Both held licences from 1997 until continuation was not sought in 2002. He had also been a director and transport manager of AS International (2000), whose licence had been revoked on financial grounds in July 2001.
Making the revocation and disqualification orders, the TC said the company had incurred prohibitions, which demonstrated a serious underlying problem. Maintenance has not been carried out regularly or effectively, despite a specific promise to that effect which it had given when the licence was granted at a public inquiry in 2002.