Decision

Decision for Mohammed Umar Latif/All Aboard Transport (PF2036231)

Published 10 February 2021

IN THE EASTERN TRAFFIC AREA

MOHAMMED UMAR LATIF

t/a ALL ABOARD TRANSPORT – PF2036231

1. CONFIRMATION OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER’S DECISION

2. Background

Mohammed Umar Latif seeks a Restricted Public Service Vehicle Operator’s Licence authorising 1 vehicle only.

The applicant has nominated one Operating Centre at JBF Storage, 1 St Martin’s Road, Hoddesdon EN11 0BT. He proposes to use a Gary Hackworthy to carry out Preventative Maintenance Inspections of the vehicle at 6-weekly intervals. In evidence I heard that he works for Epping Forest District Council, which should be listed as the proposed maintenance provider.

The applicant withdrew his application (PF2035859) for a Standard National Licence on 7 August 2020, when it transpired that Mr Latif did not have a CPC Qualification. He has proposed grant of this application, subject to the following restrictions:

• Vehicles with eight passenger seats or less will not be operated under the licence without the prior written agreement of the Traffic Commissioner who may require you to agree to certain undertakings.

• Limousines and novelty type vehicles are not to be operated under this operator’s licence.

• The operator will provide the Traffic Commissioner bank statements covering a three-month period and other financial details (such as overdraft facility agreements) in the name of MOHAMMED UMAR LATIF that show the licence holder has access to the required level of funding. These details to be provided to the Central Licencing Office in Leeds by (the last day of the sixth month after grant) and cover the whole of the months of (third, fourth and fifth months after grant).

• The operator shall, during the life of the restricted licence, keep separate records of all time spent and the gross and net income earned monthly by them from all occupations (with supporting detailed records from which these sums are derived) to enable the main occupation to be determined by the Traffic Commissioner at any time. Records shall be supported by primary evidence such as payslips, P60 documents, booking diaries, invoices, and tachograph records. Copies of the records shall be made available to the DVSA or OTC officers on request.

• Should gross income from, or time spent on, the minibus operation exceeds that from all other sources for two consecutive months, the operator will apply for a Standard licence.

3. Hearing

The Public Inquiry was listed for today, 12 January 2021, in Tribunal Room 1 of the Office of the Traffic Commissioner in Cambridge. The applicant was present via video-link in the form of Mr Latif.

4. Issues

The public inquiry was called to allow the applicant further opportunity to satisfy me that it meets the statutory criteria and is fit to hold a licence, specifically by reference to the following sections of the Public Service Vehicles Act 1981:

• 14ZB(b) – has the required financial standing.

• 14ZC(1)(b) - has satisfactory arrangements to comply with the law regarding the driving and operation of the vehicles, including the ‘main occupation’ or ‘business’ requirements to operate vehicles between 9 and 16 passenger seats under a restricted licence.

The Applicant was directed to lodge evidence in support of his application by 5 January 2021, to include financial evidence and documents showing how maintenance requirements of the licence will be met. The financial evidence submitted over a period from mid-November to mid-December 2020 appeared to meet the prescribed sum.

5. Determination

Mr Latif confirmed that he had read and was aware of the guidance. He supplied further evidence of proposed defect forms and copies of OTC and DVSA Guidance, including the Guide to Maintaining Roadworthiness which was also supplied. In evidence he provided the vehicle details as MA05 YPU, which may be re-registered under cherished plates. He confirmed the facilities available and that his vehicle would be submitted for roller brake testing at every Preventative Maintenance Inspection. Due to the age of the vehicle, he will rely on analogue tachograph charts. He will use Tachomaster to carry out an analysis of the tachographs and the weekly sheet in his diary, which is used to record his other work.

The OTC originally wrote to the applicant proposing to refuse this application based on financial evidence that was not in the name of the applicant. The applicant had been asked to provide answers to various queries arising during the processing of the application, including the source of recent deposits into the account and for details of his main occupation. He explained that another business, AlphaBravoCharlieConsultancy, of which he is a director, had gifted him the money. I heard in evidence that this is a business consultancy, of which he is the sole officer and employee. In more normal times he would expect those activities to employ for approximately 20 to 25 hours per week.

He also referred to his main occupation as a Hackney Carriage driver. In 2017/002 Mohammed Akbar t/a Choudhury Transport, the Upper Tribunal has confirmed that the starting point for the meaning of occupation is the definition found in the Oxford English Dictionary: “The state of having one’s time or attention occupied; what a person is engaged in; employment, business; work; toil…. A particular action or course of action in which a person is engaged, especially habitually; a particular job or profession; a particular pursuit or activity”.

In addition, section 13(3) of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, sets out the restrictions that an operator must fulfil and continue to fulfil, to be entitled to a restricted rather than a standard PSV licence. The Upper Tribunal has considered indicators such as hours and income that must be considered to establish “main occupation”. An applicant is required to satisfy a traffic commissioner that any particular activity other than PSV operation is an “occupation” from which income is generated and that overall, the PSV operation is not the “main occupation”. The Upper Tribunal has also confirmed that in determining “main occupation” a “bare assertion will not do” and proceeded to detail the types of evidence required.

Regrettably, insufficient detail was provided regarding his other businesses, and how this operation might relate to the activities of the Alpha Bravo Charlie Consultancy and All Aboard Transport Ltd, rather than by Mr Latif as a sole trader. The hearing allowed me to explore these issues with the applicant outside the restrictions of correspondence. An applicant for a restricted PSV operator’s licence is expected to provide a complete statement of all sources of income and amounts received. It was this exercise which proved difficult through correspondence. The application was not assisted by an absence of detail around the other aspects of his business, to which OTC referred in correspondence dated 20 October 2020. It was noted that the applicant’s website referred to the provision of 16, 18 and 24 seat minibuses, coaches, and double decker buses. Reference was made to a customer’s review, thanking the driver of Mr Latif’s Minibus. The applicant responded immediately to state that he uses other suppliers to meet the needs of customers requiring larger vehicles. He sought this licence to enable him to provide his own vehicle. In evidence I was able to confirm that the website is run by the applicant. It may pass on requests for larger vehicles, above 8 passenger seats, to other operators but there is no financial or other gain.

I referred to Mr Latif’s response of 17 September 2020, which recorded his employment as a Hackney Cab driver. He made references to links with various companies and indicated that the second space at his Operating Centre related to “other business activities”, but this was apparently contradicted by a reference to a variation application. I was able to clarify that his main occupation is as a sole trader offering an executive chauffeur services to local, businesspeople, using his Mercedes car. This application seeks to augment rather than replace those services. I went through the rather rough ‘business case’ provided but I was satisfied by his evidence that his main source of income would ensure that any PSV operation was a small fraction of his activities.

Mr Latif repeated his offer of the restrictions suggested at paragraph 3 and confirmed that he only requires authority for one public service vehicle.

• Vehicles with eight passenger seats or less will not be operated under the licence without the prior written agreement of the Traffic Commissioner who may require you to agree to certain undertakings.
• Limousines and novelty type vehicles are not to be operated under this operator’s licence.
• The operator will provide the Traffic Commissioner bank statements covering a three-month period and other financial details (such as overdraft facility agreements) in the name of MOHAMMED UMAR LATIF that show the licence holder has access to the required level of funding. These details to be provided to the Central Licencing Office in Leeds by (the last day of the sixth month after grant) and cover the whole of the months of (third, fourth and fifth months after grant).
• The operator shall, during the life of the restricted licence, keep separate records of all time spent and the gross and net income earned monthly by them from all occupations (with supporting detailed records from which these sums are derived) to enable the main occupation to be determined by the Traffic Commissioner at any time. Records shall be supported by primary evidence such as payslips, P60 documents, booking diaries, invoices, and tachograph records. Copies of the records shall be made available to the DVSA or OTC officers on request.
• Should gross income from, or time spent on, the minibus operation, exceed that from all other sources for two consecutive months, the operator will apply for a Standard licence.

I accepted that offer and attach them as conditions to this licence. In addition to the statements of intent regarding the compliance systems, summarised at paragraph 7 above, I accepted the following undertakings:

• To supply proof of attendance at a one-day operator licence management course, run by a trade association (Logistics UK/BAR/CPT), a professional body (IoTA/CILT/SOE/IRTE), a JAUPT accredited training centre or an exam centre approved by an accredited body to offer the transport manager CPC qualification in passenger transport, within two months from the date of this hearing. To be sent to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner (Licensing) / Office of the Traffic Commissioner at Cambridge. An online course is acceptable to fulfil this undertaking.
• To submit to a review of the documentation for condition 3, 4, 5 above, 12 months from the date of this hearing. DVSA may be asked to conduct a desk-based assessment of drivers’ hours and other work records, in advance of that review.

I was therefore able to grant the licence application for a restricted PSV licence, authorising one vehicle only.

Richard Turfitt

Traffic Commissioner

12 January 2021