Darlington-based Paul Nimmo, trading as P&N Travel, has lost his appeal against the refusal of Deputy Traffic Commissioner (DTC) Fiona Harrington to grant his application for a two-vehicle restricted licence, on the grounds that he had failed to meet the main occupation rule.
In refusing the application by Mr Nimmo, the DTC said that he had declared his main occupation in his application as property investment. He had said that his father had funded the purchase of two PSVs, currently off road, to help start his sole trader business.
He had made general enquiries of the local council and expected a gross income of
£400 or so each term time week, depending on the particular route serviced, for each vehicle. Mr Nimmo also intended to seek other work such as hotel VIP and airport transfers, in addition to the school contract work.
The DTC considered that he had failed to satisfy her that his main occupation would not be the operation of two 9-16 seater PSVs. The documentary evidence of declared income produced by him showed a gross income of £14,720 for the year 2015-16. School contracts for two vehicles, using Mr Nimmo’s own estimates, could reasonably be expected to generate a gross income significantly in excess of such an amount, even before other potential work was taken into account.
Mr Nimmo was at liberty to re-apply, but was advised that he should provide a complete statement of all of his sources of income and amounts received and ensure that those were consistent with, and supported by, annual accounts, tax returns and bank statements in his name. He should also demonstrate how the total of such income received was reasonably expected to continue to exceed that from the operation of the vehicle(s) if a licence was granted.
She had not proceeded to make formal findings on the matter of his good repute as Mr Nimmo had denied that his application was a front for A2B Taxis or any member of the Barnes family.
Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said that the DTC’s decision was based solely on her reasoning on the issue of the main occupation test.
Although the call-up letter made reference to the issue of good repute, the DTC made no findings on the issue and any reference to the evidence available to her on repute was in the context of any future renewed application for a licence. There was, however, a suggestion in the additional comments from the DTC that if Mr Nimmo was to renew an application for a restricted licence, then repute would be an issue for consideration in relation to that application.
