The bid for a new licence was lost after the TC found that Mr Asghar’s main occupation was likely the operation of PSVs
Oldham-based Ozayr Ahmed Asghar, trading as Ozzy’s Mini Buses, has lost his bid for a fresh licence following the revocation of a previous licence in April 2014, and his disqualification from holding a PSV O-Licence for six months.
Mr Asghar, of Windsor Road, Oldham, sought a new two-vehicle restricted licence before Traffic Commissioner (TC) Simon Evans.
The TC revoked the previous licence, after hearing that Mr Asghar had been encountered in Manchester in June 2013 driving a passenger laden minibus not then fitted with a tachograph, while uninsured for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward, and at a time when the vehicle received a delayed prohibition for a safety issue.
He had subsequently received a fixed penalty for the tachograph matter and had been fined in respect of the insurance offence in the Magistrates’ Court. He found that the income Mr Asghar then had from the use of his PSV exceeded that from other sources, that there were other concerns about the maintenance of his vehicle, and that sufficiency of financial standing was not made out.
Mr Asghar said that he was the owner of six retail units, which were let out. That business represented his main occupation. He planned to operate PSVs on school special needs contracts but also to carry out private hire work including airport runs. He estimated an income of £9,000 per annum. He accepted that carrying out airport work might be difficult if he were to avoid breaching drivers’ hour’s rules, although he planned to deploy another driver. His father, Asghar Ali, would drive for him.
Refusing the application, the TC said that Mr Asghar’s main occupation was more likely than not to be the operation of PSVs. The financial return on the letting of units had been much less in recent years than could be earned from the school contracts and other private hire work to be undertaken. A school contract, especially one of those for the carriage of those with special needs, could earn an operator £500 per week. If £500 per week per vehicle was earned on the school contract work, based on a 38 week period he could earn £38,000 per year plus any other work carried out.
A TC was the gatekeeper to the industry when considering new applications. He was not satisfied that Mr Asghar met the repute requirement. The process of making an application itself provided the first opportunity for a future operator to impress on the regulator his readiness to be compliant – more so in the case of an applicant seeking to return to the industry after a period of revocation and disqualification.
He was not satisfied that Mr Asghar’s competence and understanding of the expectations of a licence holder was at a necessary level. He concluded that the application had not been thought through. Mr Asghar’s approach had been somewhat chaotic, and that the lessons that ought to have been learnt from the previous licence had not been learnt.
