TC Evans refuses new licence, saying he ‘struggled to find’ that Peter Wright had learned from the past
Peter Wright’s Bradley Fold Travel’s bid for a new PSV O-Licence has been turned down by Traffic Commissioner (TC) Simon Evans.
The company, of Ringley Road West, Radcliffe, Manchester, of which the sole Director and proposed Transport Manager (TM) is Peter Wright, had sought a new two-vehicle national licence [routeone/Court Report/23 August].
In 2009 a licence held by the company was revoked, it being held that the company and Mr Wright had lost their repute. Both were disqualified from holding a PSV O-Licence for 18 months.
Those decisions were upheld on appeal. The refusal of claims by both the company and Mr Wright for the return of two impounded vehicles was also upheld on appeal.
In refusing the application, the TC said that Mr Wright continued to maintain in most respects that the circumstances that led to Bradley Fold’s and his own loss of repute were down to external factors not of his making.
There was little recognition of any of the criticisms of his previous practice as an operator.
There was little acknowledgement of the regulatory process itself. In a number of cases it would remain Mr Wright’s contention that he succeeded in achieving positive outcomes, when the evidence might suggest otherwise.
The manner of the completion of the application form was in itself challenging and did not increase confidence that there might be a strictly compliant attitude.
Adverse findings detracting from the repute of both Mr Wright and Bradley Fold were in the impounding proceedings when vehicles were found to be operated by him and the company unlawfully. Further adverse findings detracting from the repute of Mr Wright were the proceedings involving his vocational driving entitlement, raising concerns about ongoing compliance with relevant legislation regarding driving whether by him, or any employee of the company.
There was evidence of a continuing readiness to allow his perception of the need for justice to distract his judgement and decision making, e.g. in the stunt in bringing a box marked “unexploded bomb” to the hearing.
He derived no reassurance as a result of Mr Wright’s sole directorship of Bradley Fold and therefore the probable absence of any direct challenge to the guiding mind of operations, in terms of his approach to licence compliance. His attitude towards some DVSA staff did not inspire confidence in terms of compliance.
The Mr Wright who appeared before him was very little changed in terms of his attitude to the basic requirements of licence compliance than had previously been the case.
He found it no less likely today that he would seek to challenge the regulatory process, to interpret the law differently to suit his beliefs, and to fail to place the interests of road safety before a desire to challenge what he regarded as unfair.
He struggled to find that Mr Wright had learned from the past, because there was manifest denial that anything was wrong.
