The one-vehicle restricted licence held by Wigan-based Richard and Sheila Ashcroft was revoked after a failure to provide evidence of compliance with the small vehicle conditions on their licence and evidence that the partnership was still in existence.
The partners, trading as R&A Ashcroft, had been called before Deputy Traffic Commissioner (DTC) Anthony Seculer at a Golborne Public Inquiry.
Asked why Mrs Ashcroft was not present, Mr Ashcroft said that she was unwell and had been for over 12 months.
After the DTC said that a key issue was whether Mr Ashcroft was a sole trader, he said they had been married for 54 years and had done everything as a partnership. He agreed there were no documents to show that there was a partnership or a partnership deed.
For the partnership, Bill Bowling, Legislation Officer of the National Limousine and Chauffeurs Association (NLCA), said that a partnership deed was in the hands of a solicitor and could be produced once it was completed.
The DTC pointed out that it had been clearly spelt out in a proposal-to-revoke letter that if there was no evidence that it was a partnership the licence would be revoked. Even a statement produced was in Mr Ashcroft’s name only and the requested financial evidence had not been produced.
After Mr Bowing said that bank statements could be produced within 24 hours, the DTC said that he did not doubt that money was available, but the matter had been going on for a couple of years.
Concerns had also been raised over whether the small vehicle conditions on the licence were being complied with. Wigan Borough Council had indicated that they felt a private hire licence was required because of the nature of the work being done.
Mr Ashcroft said there were a lot of people doing similar work in the area who were not with Wigan Council.
The DTC said that evidence had been requested about the use of separate fares and about advertising to the public, but nothing had been produced. The only thing he had was a 2016 schedule of journeys undertaken which did not provide evidence of compliance with the conditions.
Mr Ashcroft maintained that they did advertise and left cards so that people could get in touch, but the DTC said that there was no supporting documentation before him.
A specific request had been made for details of the advertisements, but there was just a typed statement without copies of the advertisements. Mr Ashcroft admitted that he had not complied with a condition that he keep an audit trail of his bookings through the NLCA website.
The DTC said that there had been more than sufficient time for the documentation to be produced. There was no good explanation of why the bank account had been changed from a joint account into Mr Ashcroft’s name only. The flagrant breach of undertakings when the licence was granted was unacceptable.
