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 
Prove ownership or lose it
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
An ownership dispute brea cs out over an impounded truck, but the -1(
stands firm and a Tribunal stands behind him.
A HAULIER'S BID to get an unlicensed truck back has been thrown out by the Transport Tribunal which backed the IC's decision that he was not the owner.
John Barry Hogger. trading as East London Transport, sought the return of the vehicle on the grounds that he did not know it was being used illegally (CM 13 February). But Eastern Traffic Commissioner Geoffrey Simms decided an attempt had been made to hoodwink him over its ownership.
An impounded truck will only be returned if ownership can be proved and the owner can prove he did not know the truck was operating illegally.
The truck in question had a troubled history. The TC was told that an overloaded antic carrying wine was stopped in a check at Crick in September. The tractor was sign written in the name of JCH Haulage, but checks carried out with the Traffic Area Office failed to find a valid 0-licence in the name of JCH Haulage or JCH Transport.
The driver was escorted to the delivery point and the unladen vehicle was then detained. The registered keeper of the vehicle was JCH Transport and prohibition notices had been issued to the vehicle while being used by that company.
JCH Transport had presented the vehicle to theThurrockTest Station for annual test in July. The driver had said that he was working for JCHTfansport and documents obtained from the consignor,Seawheel,showed a contractual relationship between the two.
A Companies House search produced no evidence of a company called JCH Transport, but the search found JCH Haulage with a registered office based at JCH Transport's premises in Grays. VAT registration was in the name of JCH Haulage, a company owned by Hogger's father. John Barry Hogger was shown as having resigned as a director at the end of August.
Hogger denied having been a director of JCH Haulage but admitted having worked for it. A witness for Hogger, Gary Cummings, said he had sold the disputed vehicle to East London Transport on 10 August. The TC did not believe this, concluding that John Barry Hogger was not the owner and the truck, in fact, belonged to JCH Haulage.
Paul Carless, for Hogger, told the Tribunal that his client had been seriously disadvantaged because he was illiterate and had not been represented before the TC. His credibility had been undermined by the documentation from Companies House. which contradicted his assertion that he had never been a director of JCH Haulage. If the true position had been put before the TC the outcome would have been different.said Carless.
Dismissing Hogger's appeal, the Tribunal said that the basis of the TC's conclusion was the unsatisfactory evidence from Cummings coupled with the documentation showing that JCH Transport or JCH Haulage was the owner of the vehicle.
There had been no formal finding that Hugger was a director of JCH Haulage — the TC had simply stated that the records showed he was a director.TheTC was plainly entitled to reach the conclusion that he had. •