Traffic Commissioner (TC) Kevin Rooney has ordered Slough-based Euromar and its Director Marek Orzechowski to pay £125 costs after failing to attend a Public Inquiry (PI).
The firm had applied for a one-vehicle international licence. It was called to a PI because it had again failed to satisfy that the requirement for financial standing could be met once a vehicle had been acquired.
In refusing the application, the TC said that he was minded to make an order for costs against Euromar and/or Mr Orzechowski in the amount of £125. Euromar and Mr Orzechowski had seven days to make representations against such an order [routeone/Court Report/21 March]. Subsequently nothing was heard from either the company or Mr Orzechowski, so the TC imposed the costs order.
In his decision following the PI the TC said that Mr Orzechowski had requested the presence of a Polish interpreter who arrived by 1000hrs – in good time for the PI, which was due to start at 1030hrs. He had prepared for the case including producing versions of the European Regulation in Polish in an attempt to assist the applicant. At 1019hrs, his office received an email which advised that Mr Orzechowski had flu and was unable to attend. No application for an adjournment was made.
Mr Orzechowski was the sole director of Polski Express Transport which, twice in 2010, sought a five-vehicle international licence. Those applications were withdrawn by the Central Licensing Unit (CLU) as the application fee failed and could not be processed.
In 2014 and 2016, Euromar sought a one-vehicle international licence. Both applications were refused on financial grounds, decisions upheld by the Upper Tribunal on appeal [routeone/Court Report/5 August 2015 and 19 April 2017].
The bank statements produced were bolstered significantly by four deposits. It was clear that the requirement for financial standing of £7,950 for one vehicle failed to be met. The company had failed to demonstrate how it could have access to a public service vehicle when it had, on the face of the evidence provided, no money. Access to a vehicle was a key limb of the requirement of stable establishment.
The call-in letter requested the applicant to attend one hour before the PI was due to begin. To achieve that, Mr Orzechowski would have to leave his home in Slough at around 0700hrs. It followed that he must have made his decision not to attend by around that time. It was therefore entirely unreasonable that he did not inform the Traffic Area Office (TAO) until 1019hr. Had he notified the TAO earlier, the interpreter could have been stood down.
As it was, the public purse would be standing a charge of between £180 and £240. That was on top of the time taken to prepare the PI brief, his time, his clerk’s time and the cost of having a tribunal room empty for a morning. That behaviour was improper and unreasonable conduct in relation to the PI.
