Mr Wright is to appeal the TC’s decision, which was made after he drove without Driver CPC
Peter Wright’s vocational PSV driving licence was suspended indefinitely by Traffic Commissioner (TC) Kevin Rooney until such time as he has acquired a Driver CPC.
It followed Mr Wright being twice checked by DVSA while driving a vehicle for Rojay Services, trading as Wigan Coachways.
In doing so, the TC said that he did not consider Mr Wright’s argument that the Recital to the European Directive exempted drivers who had Category D1 licences prior to the date laid down for obtaining a CPC from having to hold one had any merit at all. Such an exemption was not in the list of exemptions in the Directive itself. Article 4 exempted drivers who had held such licences from the initial qualification requirement but not from having to undertake periodic training.
Though revoking Rojay’s eight-vehicle national licence on financial grounds, the company of Cricket, Wigan having ceased to trade last August, the TC took no action against the repute of Managing Director and Transport Manager Roger Jarvis because of its otherwise good compliance history.
Traffic Examiner Aidan McCabe said that when interviewed Mr Wright explained his position in some detail, referring to the case of another driver Craig Watts, who was challenging the requirement for him to have a Driver CPC.
Mr Wright said that when his company, Bradley Fold Travel, had its O-Licence revoked there were outstanding bookings and Mr Jarvis took them over. When he lost his own vehicles Mr Jarvis suggested that he drive for him. When asked why he did not have a CPC, he produced a number of documents to Mr Jarvis which he believed showed that he did not require one.
After Mr Jarvis had said that in October he had written surrendering the company’s licence and returned the licence discs, the TC said that followed a proposal to revoke. In response Mr Jarvis wrote a letter, which included a statement saying the TC would be joined in defamation proceedings. Asked why, Mr Jarvis said he did not wish to comment. He had written the letter after discussions with a number of people. Asked if they included Mr Wright, Mr Jarvis said he did not want to say who.
Mr Jarvis said that he had read the documentation given him by Mr Wright. He thought that if he had been a large operator he would not have risked his O-Licence but he felt that someone “should stick his head above the parapet and take on DVSA over their interpretation of the law”. He had no issues with Mr Wright or his conduct as a driver. He had given him a driving test before allowing him to drive. He had not employed Mr Wright as a ‘cause celeb’.
Mr Wright is to appeal the TC’s decision.
