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 
No return for scaffolding vehicle operated without an 0-licence
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A READING scaffolder has lost his bid for the return of a vehicle impounded by VOSA in May.
South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Christopher Heaps, was told that the vehicle was impounded after being stopped in a check at Greenford, Middlesex. The driver had said he was carrying scaffolding on behalf of his employer Anthony Deacon. Deacon, who was also in the vehicle, declined to say anything.
In his application for the return of the vehicle, Deacon said that in the past he had only been using small vehicles for his scaffolding work. He had just obtained the larger vehicle and was in the process of submitting an application for an 0-licence.
The TC said no application for a licence had been received. Deacon was reported for the unauthorised use of a vehicle in November 2002. In April 2003 he was convicted by Reading magistrates of operating without an 0-licence and having no test certificate; he was fined a total of £2,000.
Those convictions were inconsistent with Deacon's statement that he had only been using small vehicles. Deacon was travelling in the vehicle when it was detained.
The TC concluded that he could not deny that he was aware of the requirement to have an 0-licence, not only because of his conviction but also because he had claimed he was in the process of submitting a licence application.