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 
Ignoring undertakings costs firm dear
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A HAULIER that had its licence revoked after failing to provide financial information to a public inquiry has lost its appeal to the Transport Tribunal.
Pickering-based David Henry Hunter & Partners held a licence for three vehicles and four trailers.
In September 2007, the Traffic Area Office wrote to the company asking for comments about outstanding County Court Judgements and for three months' bank statements, as well as details and information about any overdraft facilities.
No reply was received, and the firm was called to a public inquiry before the North Eastern Traffic Commissioner Tom Macartney. The TC was informed that the company's bank was prepared to grant a loan that would enable the balance of the County Court Judgements to be paid.
The TC decided to take no action against the company after receiving reassurances and undertakings that evidence of an adequate overdraft facility and that the County Court Judgements had been paid off would be provided within 30 days.
The evidence, however, was not forthcoming, and the licence was revoked as a result.
Before the Tribunal, David Hunter said that the paperwork had not arrived quickly enough, but that it was now available.
The Tribunal said that it was apparent that Hunter had not pressed the bank to act more quickly, nor had he explained the difficult situation to the Traffic Area Office.
Instead, he had allowed the matter to "go to sleep", and the result was that the deadline passed with no action being taken.
The Tribunal was unable to take into account a majority of the information provided from the bank because it had come into existence after the licence had been revoked.