Decision

Decision for Global Transport Leics Ltd

Published 9 February 2024

IN THE EAST OF ENGLAND TRAFFIC AREA

1. PUBLIC INQUIRY IN CAMBRIDGE ON 18 JANUARY 2024

2. APPLICANT: GLOBAL TRANSPORT LEICS LTD

3. DECISION OF THE DEPUTY TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER

---

4. Background

The sole director of Global Transport Leics Ltd is Mohammed Saleem. The company attended a public inquiry in Cambridge on 31 August 2023, when its licence was revoked (with effect from 13 October 2023) by the senior traffic commissioner for serious maintenance failings. Mr Saleem was disqualified indefinitely from acting as transport manager.   

On 1 September 2023 (i.e. the day after the public inquiry) Global Transport Leics Ltd applied for a standard international goods vehicle operator’s licence for 5 vehicles and 5 trailers. The nominated transport manager was Michelle Scott. Unsurprisingly, the application was called in for consideration at a public inquiry. This took place in Cambridge on 18 January 2024.

5. Public inquiry

In advance of the inquiry the applicant provided submissions setting out how it intended, this time round, to ensure that vehicles were kept fit and roadworthy, to ensure that the rules relating to drivers’ hours and tachographs were observed, to ensure that drivers carried out effective walk-round checks etc. It also described arrangements for ensuring that the third party trailers the company intended to draw were in a roadworthy condition – this had been a particular feature of the August 2023 inquiry. The submission further set out the intended employment basis for the drivers -  the use of so-called self-employed drivers had been criticised by the senior traffic commissioner in his decision of 31 August 2023. A copy of a training certificate was enclosed with the submission, showing that Mr Saleem had attended a nine-day transport manager CPC course in November 2023. Details of Michelle Scott’s credentials and experience as a transport manager were provided.

During the inquiry I asked Mr Saleem and prospective transport manager Michelle Scott questions about how they intended to manage the licence if granted. My main remaining concern on this subject, after I had received answers, was that the company still intended to use the same external maintenance provider who had proved unsatisfactory on the previous licence.

I had also noted that the vehicles which had been specified on the licence of Global Transport Leics Ltd on 13 October 2023 (the date the revocation of its licence took effect) were all still registered to the company. I asked Mr Saleem what had happened to them. He told me that Global had them on a finance lease from Volvo, and that they were now with other operators who were paying the finance charges direct to Volvo. I noted that the vehicles were still based at the operating centre at Wagon Works, Coalville, although they were now on other operators’ licences. I asked Mr Saleem whether he was still driving one of the vehicles and he replied that he had continued to drive one of the vehicles “for a few days” after the licence revocation, on behalf of another operator Taz Handling Ltd. I asked if Taz had paid him for this driving and Mr Saleem replied no.

I further noted that the bank statements from NatWest provided to the inquiry showed very few transactions. There was clearly another bank account with Metro Bank, statements from which had been provided as part of the original application but not updated for the inquiry.

I asked Mr Saleem whether he would be prepared to accept a number of vehicles lower than the five applied for and he said that he would be content to start with two or three.

At this point I adjourned the inquiry in order to receive:

• Bank statements from the account with Metro Bank covering the most recent three months. I wanted to make sure that the company had not continued to operate after 13 October 2023, the date on which the revocation of its licence had taken effect.

• A download of Mr Saleem’s tachograph card covering the period since 13 October 2023. I wanted to check his statement that he had continued to drive one of his vehicles for just a few days after this date, on behalf of another operator.

I asked that this information be provided by close of business on 24 January 2024: Mr Saleem agreed to provide it by this date.

6. Further information

On 23 January 2024 the prospective transport manager Michelle Scott emailed my clerk to say that Mr Saleem had decided that operating only two vehicles would not be a financially viable proposition and that he therefore wished either to withdraw Global’s application or have it refused. No bank statements or tachograph download data were forthcoming.

In the meantime, I had also noted that vehicles PE67 HZW and WU67 CAO (vehicles which had been on Global’s licence when revocation took effect on 13 October 2023 and which had been specified at the end of that same day on the licence of Taz Handling Ltd) had been removed from Taz’s licence by someone at that company at 1247 hours on 18 January 2024, just a few minutes after the public inquiry was adjourned.

7. Consideration

I have considerable concern that Global Transport Leics may have continued to operate beyond 13 October 2023, in defiance of the revocation of its licence from that date by the senior traffic commissioner. All three vehicles on its licence continued to be based at the Wagon Works operating centre in Coalville, albeit on other operators’ licences. Global Transport Leics remained as the vehicles’ registered keeper. Mohammed Saleem continued to drive one of the vehicles, without payment from the operator on whose licence it now was. Global Transport Leics failed to provide further bank statements and tachograph data which might have helped resolve this issue one way or the other. As it is, I conclude that there are significant indications that the company continued to operate HGVs after revocation of its licence: the company’s failure to provide the further information it promised at the inquiry and the removal of the two vehicles from Taz’s licence at the very moment the inquiry ended has done nothing to lessen the strength of these indications.

8. Decision

In these circumstances, I cannot be satisfied that the applicant is of good repute. I am accordingly refusing the application under Section 13A(2)(b) of the 1995 Act.

8.1 Nicholas Denton

Deputy Traffic Commissioner

25 January 2024