Decision for ADRIAN STUART FOLBIGG t/a T & A FREIGHT (OF2007797)

Written confirmation of the decision of the Traffic Commissioner in the East of England for ADRIAN STUART FOLBIGG t/a T & A FREIGHT and as TRANSPORT MANAGER and drivers ALAN TITMUS and DEAN FOSTER

• From: Traffic Commissioners for Great Britain
• Published: 5 August 2026

• Subject: Driver conduct, HGV operator and Transport manager
• Region: Eastern
• Case type: Regulatory
• Regulatory decision: Formal warning, Licence curtailed or authorisation reduced and Licence revoked
• Published: 16 July 2026

IN THE EASTERN TRAFFIC AREA

ADRIAN STUART FOLBIGG t/a T & A FREIGHT - OF2007797

AND AS TRANSPORT MANAGER

AND

DRIVERS: ALAN TITMUS and DEAN FOSTER

[REDACTED]

CONFIRMATION OF THE TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER’S DECISION

Decision

I therefore curtailed the licence to 8 vehicles and 5 trailers, with effect from 23:45 on 14 July 2026. The operator was given 7 days to return the relevant discs to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner in Cambridge. Repute was only just retained by operator and transport manager.

Mr. Foster had his vocational licence revoked

Mr. Titmus was issued with a formal warning

Background

Adrian Folbigg holds a Standard National Goods Vehicle Operator’s Licence authorising  12 vehicles and 5 trailers. The operator is also the Transport Manager.

There is one Operating Centre: 4 Tyne Road, Sandy SG19 1SA. Preventative Maintenance Inspections are said to be carried out by Commercial Vehicle Repairs at 6-weekly intervals.

This licence was granted from 17 November 2017 at the current authorisation, following the revocation of a Standard National licence, OF0221205, held by a partnership between Adrian Folbigg and Peter George Lewis Folbigg. At a Public Inquiry on 17 August 2017, it was found that there had been a change in entity to a sole trader. It was also found that undertakings relating to maintenance and drivers’ hours had been breached. It led to Mr Folbigg applying for this licence in his own name.

Hearing

The Public Inquiry was listed for 14 July 2026, in Tribunal Room 1 of the Office of the Traffic Commissioner in Cambridge. The operator was present, represented by Chris Harrington of CE Transport Law. The drivers were also present.

Issues

The public inquiry was called following notice that I was considering grounds to intervene in respect of this licence and specifically by reference to the following sections of the Goods Vehicle (Licensing of Operators) Act:

• ·       26(1)(b) – conditions on licence to notify changes, in this case relating to maintenance and to meet the licence requirements.
• ·       26(1)(e) – statements relating to inspection intervals, and to abide by conditions on the licence
• ·       26(1)(f) – undertakings (vehicles to be kept fit and serviceable, effective driver defect reporting, complete maintenance records, drivers’ hours and tachographs)
• ·       26(1)(h) – material change in fitness to hold the licence and in the availability of finance required.
• ·       28 – Disqualification.

Mr Folbigg was also called to consider whether he had exercised effective and continuous management and therefore whether I should make a finding under section 27(1)(b) preventing him from relying on his Certificate of Professional Competence.

Driver Foster was called to a conjoined Driver Conduct Hearing to consider whether he should be permitted to continue to rely on his vocational driving entitlement.

Driver Titmus was also called to a conjoined Driver Conduct Hearing to consider whether he should be permitted to continue to rely on his vocational driving entitlement.

The operator was directed to lodge evidence in support including financial, maintenance and other compliance documentation. Compliance documentation was to be submitted to DVSA by no later than 30 June 2026 with finance and any representations to be sent to my office by 2 July 2026. I allowed Mr Harrington an extension to 12 pm on 1 July 2026 but even then, it was not supplied on time: “The later than planned submission was entirely my fault. I had commitment that overran. All material should now be present.”

The financial evidence was received in the name ‘T & A Freight’ but disclosed an average far below the prescribed sum. Representations accepted that financial standing would not be met and then attempted to argue that funds held by another person should be taken into account, despite the clear guidance and directions of the Senior Traffic Commissioner in his document No. 2 on Finance. (REDACTED)

Summary of Evidence

On 1 August 2024, MY53 OCF was encountered by DVSA whilst being driven by Dean Foster. Traffic Examiner Amy Cromer checked the tachograph records, which revealed periods of driving with the driver card removed during the working day.

Traffic Examiner Claire Nicholson followed lines of inquiry with a statutory request under section 99ZA sent on 16 July 2025. The data supplied revealed further instances where the driver card had been removed in circumstances suggesting that that this might be a deliberate action so as to avoid a record which would exceed the 4.5 hour driving and maximum daily driving time. An analysis across other specified vehicles showed that these instances were not isolated to that vehicle (pages 106 to 109).

The following findings related to Driver Dean Foster:

• 28 March 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 03:22. After driving 4 hours 8 minutes at 08:21, ejected digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 38 minutes covering 19 kilometres. At 09:14 inserted digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his tachograph card as a qualifying break, then continued to drive for a further 2 hours 4 minutes and finished duty at 11:47. A total of 6 hours 50 minutes with one break of 16 minutes
• 2 April 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:23. After driving 3 hours 51 minutes at 08:23, ejected digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 57 minutes covering 28 kilometres. At 09:36 inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his tachograph card as a qualifying break, then continued to drive for a further 3 hours 59 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 14:01. Drove between 06:04 and 07:05 for 1 hour 1 minute, prior to ejecting his tachograph card, then drove for a total of 5 hours 51 minutes from 07:05 with no qualifying break or breaks.
• 3 April 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 03:58. After driving 2 hours 10 minutes at 08:36, ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 2 minutes covering 61 kilometres. At 09:44 inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 1 hour 3 minutes to finish duty at 12:31. Mr Foster had taken a recorded break of 16 minutes between 04:34 and 04:50 and drove for a total of 4 hours 15 minutes
• 5 April 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 00:40. After driving 3 hours 44 minutes at 05:15, ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 53 minutes covering 55 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 06:22 Mr Foster inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating a break. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:28. He had taken a recorded break of 35 minutes between 04:54 and 05:29 - not a full qualifying break. He drove for a total of 7 hours 37 minutes with one break of 35 minutes.
• 15 April - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:28. After driving 4 hours 3 minutes at 07:01, ejected his digital tachograph card  and continued to drive for 43 minutes covering 39.1 kilometres. At 08:06 inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 49 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 11:29. He drove for a total of 7 hours 33 minutes with one break of 16 minutes between 06:02 and 06:18.
• 29 April 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:22. After driving 3 hours 14 minutes at 07:21 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 5 minutes covering 79 kilometres. At 08:37 inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 1 hours 10 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 10:03. He drove for a total of 5 hours 29 minutes with one break of 18 minutes between 03:13 and 03:31.
• 30 April 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:17. After driving 3 hours 14 minutes at 07:21 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 5 minutes covering 79 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 08:37 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He  continued to drive for a further 1 hours 10 minutes and finished duty at 10:03. He drove for a total of 6 hours 18 minutes with one break of 18 minutes between 06:22 and 06:40.
• 5 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 04:03. After driving 3 hours 21 minutes at 08:00 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 58 minutes covering 53.2 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 09:43 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 55 minutes and finished duty at 13:47. He drove for a total of 8 hours 14 minutes with the longest period where the vehicle was stationary being 22 minutes (when the card had been ejected).
• 10 May 2024 - commenced duty at 02:28 in MY53 OCF. After driving 1 hour 22 minutes, he declared a break of 59 minutes and continued to drive from 04:56 until 09:19 when he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 18 minutes covering 12 kilometres. At 10:01 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 1 hour 35 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:27. He drove for a total of 5 hours 44 minutes with one break of 18 minutes between 06:12 and 06:30.
• 14 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:53. After driving 3 hours 6 minutes at 07:50 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 36 minutes covering 29 kilometres. At 08:33 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 8 minutes and finished duty at 12:08. He drove for a total of 6 hours 50 minutes with one break immediately before he ejected his digital tachograph card, commencing 07:30 – 07:50 for 20 minutes.
• 17 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into vehicle MY53 OCF at 02:38. After driving 15 minutes he declared a break of 1 hour 11 minutes from 03:07 – 04:18 when he continued with his duties. Mr Foster drove for 2 hours 56 minutes when he ejected his digital tachograph card at 08:57 and continued to drive for 50 minutes covering 39.4 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 10:00 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 2 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 13:24. He drove for a total of 6 hours 48 minutes with two breaks, one from 06:18 – 06:38 for 20 minutes and one from 08:03 – 08:26 for 23 minutes.
• 20 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:22 After driving 2 hours 27 minutes at 05:24 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 39 minutes covering 17 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 06:06 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 28 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:27. He drove for a total of 5 hours 34 minutes with one break immediately prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card from 05:04 – 05:24 for 21 minutes.
• 21 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:38 After driving 2 hours 31 minutes at 04:43 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 23 minutes covering 16 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 06:33 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. Mr Foster continued to drive for a further 4 hours 30 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 11:35. He drove for a total of 4 hours 53 minutes with one break immediately prior to ejecting his digital tachograph card from 04:21 – 04:41 for 20 minutes.
• 22 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:23. After driving 3 hours 42 minutes at 08:48 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 49 minutes covering 49.4 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 10:01 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 8 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:57.He drove for a total of 6 hours 39 minutes with one recorded break of 16 minutes from 04:55 – 05:11.
• 24 May 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 03:04 After driving 2 hours 10 minutes at 06:23 he ejected his digital tachograph  card and continued to drive for 1 hour 3 minutes covering 53.5 kilometres without his digital 100 tachograph card. At 07:53 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 30 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 10:51. He drove for a total of 5 hours 43 minutes with one recorded break of 30 minutes from 04:36 – 05:05.
• 3 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:38 After driving 2 hours 52 minutes at 06:58 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 24 minutes covering 12 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:56 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 11 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 10:25. He drove for a total of 5 hours 27 minutes with two recorded breaks, one of 34 minutes between 05:11 and 05:45 and the second of 28 minutes between 05:50 and 06:18.
• 4 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into  MY53 OCF 01:52. After driving 2 hours 49 minutes at 05:39 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 25 minutes covering 91 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:30 he inserted his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 27 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 11:11. He drove for a total of 7 hours 41 minutes with one recorded break of 17 minutes from 04:43 – 05:00. There was a further break recorded after he had ejected his digital tachograph card, this was from 05:39 – 05:58 for 19 minutes.
• 5 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:27 and drove for 2 hours 28 minutes and had a qualifying break of 1 hour 12 minutes between 04:09 and 05:21. He continued to drive from 05:21 – 10:12 where he had driven for 4 hours 11 minutes. At 10:12 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 34 minutes covering 41 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 11:17 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 48 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:21. He drove for a total of 5 hours 33 minutes with no breaks from 05:21 – 12:21.
• 6 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:41. After driving 3 hours 33 minutes at 05:54 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 42 minutes covering 69 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:55 he re-entered his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 28 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:05. He drove for a total of 8 hours 43 minutes with one recorded break of 26 minutes from 05:28 – 05:54 when he ejected his digital tachograph card.
• 7 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:02. After driving 3 hours 14 minutes at 06:25 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 8 minutes covering 4 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:07 he inserted his digital tachograph card and completed a manual entry on his digital tachograph card indicating that he had taken a break. He continued to drive for a further 4 hours 11 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty 13:13. He drove for a total of 7 hours 33 minutes with one recorded break of 55 minutes 102 from 07:09 – 08:04.
• 11 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:46. After driving 3 hours 5 minutes at 05:23 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 51 minutes covering 51 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 06:15 he inserted his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 9 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:50. He drove for a total of 7 hours 5 minutes with one recorded break of 20 minutes from 05:04 to 05:24.
• 13 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:02. After driving 2 hours 53 minutes at 05:22 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 2 hours 44 minutes covering 199.8 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 08:39 he inserted his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 29 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:37. He drove for a total of 9 hours 6 minutes with no recorded nor qualifying breaks.
• 20 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:50. After driving 2 hours 56 minutes at 05:18 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hours 34 minutes covering 96 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 06:53 he inserted his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 38 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 10:10. He drove for a total of 7 hours 8 minutes with no recorded qualifying breaks.
• 24 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:34. After driving 2 hours 48 minutes at 04:53 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 49 minutes covering 45 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 05:55 he inserted his digital tachograph card and declared a manual entry of rest on his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 2 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:42. He drove for a total of 6 hours 39 minutes with one break of 29 minutes
• 25 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:58. After driving 3 hours 40 minutes at 06:31 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 14 minutes covering 77.9 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:48 he inserted his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 2 hours 13 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:01. He drove for a total of 5 hours 57 minutes with one break of 35 minutes between 01:58 and 09:36.
• 26 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:28. After driving 2 hours 26 minutes at 05:22 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 36 minutes covering 33 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 05:59 he inserted his digital tachograph card and declared a manual entry of rest on his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 3 hours 5 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:45. He drove for a total of 6 hours 7 minutes with one break of 16 minutes prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card.
• 28 June 2024 - digital tachograph card into vehicle MY53 OCF at 01:16. After driving 2 hours 30 minutes he took a qualifying break of 1 hour 7 minutes from 04:04 – 05:11 and a further break of 20 minutes from 06:01 – 06:21. He drove from 05:11 – 08:19 for 2 hours 14 minutes before ejecting his digital tachograph card at 08:19. He continued to drive for 30 minutes covering 29 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 09:07 he inserted his digital tachograph card and declared a manual entry of rest on his digital tachograph card. He continued to drive for a further 4 hours 19 minutes with his digital tachograph card. He ejected his digital tachograph card at 13:28 and continued to drive without his digital tachograph card for 15 minutes covering 8 kilometres. He finished duty at 13:48. He drove for a total of 7 hours 18 minutes with one break of 20 minutes prior to ejecting his digital tachograph card.
• 1 July 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:54. After driving 3 hours 59 minutes at 06:27 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 52 minutes covering 40 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:59 he inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 4 hours 30 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 13:01. He drove for a total of 9 hours 21 minutes with one break of 17 minutes prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card.
• 3 July 2024 - digital tachograph card into KF17 NLU at 01:52. After driving 2 hours 53 minutes at 05:24 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 31 minutes covering 61 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. 27 104 At 06:28 He inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a 105 further 3 hours 38 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 10:51. He drove for a total of 7 hours 32 minutes with one break of 21 minutes prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card.
• 4 July 2024 -s digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:00. After driving 2 hours 57 minutes at 05:15 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 30 minutes covering 91 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:09 he inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 2 hours 19 minutes with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 09:42. He drove for a total of 6 hours 46 minutes with no qualifying breaks.
• 26 July 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:47. After driving 3 hours 37 minutes at 06:46 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 52 minutes covering 38 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 07:49 he inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 4 hours 1 minute with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:14 he drove for a total of 8 hours 30 minutes with one break of 22 minutes prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card.
• 29 July 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 01:49. After driving 4 hours 5 minutes at 06:34 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 25 minutes covering 72.4 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 08:42 he inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 4 hours 12 minutes with his digital tachograph card. At 13:21 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 31 minutes covering 21 kilometres and finished duty at 14:04. He drove for a total of 10 hours 13 minutes with one break of 20 minutes prior to him ejecting his digital tachograph card at 06:34.
• 30 July 2024 - digital tachograph card into MY53 OCF at 02:58. After driving 3 hours 34 minutes at 07:36 he ejected his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for 1 hour 13 minutes covering 68 kilometres without his digital tachograph card. At 09:95 he inserted his digital tachograph card and continued to drive for a further 3 hours 1 minute with his digital tachograph card and finished duty at 12:29 He drove for a total of 7 hours 48 minutes with no qualifying break or breaks.

The Traffic Examiner conducted a visit to the operator on 28 November 2025, leading to a Traffic Examiner Visit Report dated 2 January 2026. The Traffic Examiner identified following areas of concern:

• Weak scheduling practices, with no assigned person and no link between scheduling and drivers’ hours monitoring systems.
• Inadequate tachograph data controls, including unsupported download intervals, missing data that obstructed the infringement monitoring process, and unresolved equipment faults.
• No missing mileage reporting and ineffective Working Time (WTD) oversight, with reports signed but not acted upon.
• Lack of disciplinary or monitoring procedures, with repeat infringements neither
• documented nor addressed.
• Three self-employed drivers, who work on a part-time, as-needed basis.
• Absence of documented driver training, with all instruction delivered verbally and no evidence retained.
• Lack of professional development by the Transport Manager since obtaining his CPC in 2016.

The operator responded on 2 January 2026 with general assurances, which have been summarised as follows:

• He would book a CPC refresher course.
• Megan Folbigg, the operator’s daughter and the General Manager, would complete a CPC qualification.
• He had implemented a safe loading training programme.
• He has in place regular drug testing and eyesight checks.
• Tachograph offences were missed because this used to be monitored by an
• office manager who had left the business suddenly, and nobody else in the business was trained in using the systems.
• The business planned to start using TachoMaster.
• They had created and circulated a disciplinary procedure.

Following the visit, the operator was required to provide updated downloads for all drivers and vehicle units for the control period of 28 May 2025 to 28 November 2025. That data was received in December 2025 and confirmed one further instance of deliberate card removal by driver Alan Titmus, which occurred when the driver was approaching the 4½ hour driving limit. Mr Titmus was interviewed under caution on 8 January 2026 in relation to that offence. He referred to receiving instructions via the company. In the interview, he admitted he had removed his card at 4 hours 29 minutes and then continued for an additional 44 minutes to conceal the fact that he was running a personal errand:  I pulled the card out to go to the airport, I had to pick the Mrs up from the airport I was running late, also I think I was stuck in traffic on the M25 for ages and it made me run over time. His answers supported the view that responsibilities had been delegated away. DVSA ultimately issued a warning letter to Mr Titmus on 19 February 2026. See reference to an additional offence, below.

Formal notice was sent to the operator on 30 March 2026, putting him on notice of the seriousness of these allegations and as to the potential impact on the operator’s licence. It identified the operator’s links to T&A Freight (UK) Ltd and the similarities with the trading name of T&A Freight. It sought a review of financial evidence. The operator’s response was received on 15 April 2026, in which he indicated that he relied on his Compliance Manager to carry out the oversight of driver duties, but that the manager had now left the business. That raised concerns as to delegation of Transport Manager responsibilities and a lack of oversight. He had also dismissed Driver Foster after the roadside encounter. The operator sought to assure me that he was not operating as the limited company, which was engaged in warehousing for stock shortage. Invoices and bank statements were also provided. The operator referred to the following remedial actions:

• attendance at a CPC refresher course.
• regular tachograph monitoring and downloading, disciplinary procedures, and driver declarations regarding mobile phone use, seatbelt use, and medical fitness.

In the past 5 years, the operator was subject to 3 traffic encounters, but no prohibitions. A number of tachograph offences were found at the encounter on 1 August 2024, with 3 other driver offences recorded at previous encounters. Ms Nicholson’s update report of 30 June 2026 was based on tachograph data supplied for 5 drivers and 4 vehicles. The operator submitted documentation relating to driver and vehicle tachograph data (December 2025 to June 2026), Driver licence checks, Driver infringement reports, Vehicle download/mileage reports, Training (CPD) records and Disciplinary processes. Most of the requested material was supplied, but some information was missing or incomplete. Licence checks were conducted regularly for some drivers but there were no checks provided for Alan Titmus and Minel Garboan. Infringement reports were produced, but additional infringements were identified in tachograph data that were not included in the submitted reports. Those included incidents involving Stewart Edmonds (16 March 2026) and Alan Titmus (7 April 2026). Some infringements suggested improper tachograph use (e.g., leaving cards in vehicles while off duty), suggesting insufficient driver management or training. The Examiner noted some inconsistencies with infringement reports featuring drivers not listed in the licence check records (e.g., Nicholas Smith, Lee Henry, Robert Best), indicating poor record oversight.

1. The Vehicle Examiner report dated 2 July 2026 refers to maintenance records as listed below for vehicles FJ69 ZWH, MY53 OCF, and KP60 ECW but only 1 trailer from 23 December 2025. The planner listed the 9 specified vehicles and 2 trailers. However, it was not legible. KP60 ECW was inspected outside the correct ISO week by 2 days. Trailer C336518 was shown to have been inspected 5 weeks outside of the correct ISO week.

All of the records appeared to record preset pressures and not the initial checks recorded, as set out in the Guide to Maintaining Roadworthiness. None of the vehicle inspection records had space for tyre date codes to be checked or recorded The Examiner only found 2 brake test records: FJ69 ZWH on 18 June 2026 at 14:10 and MY53 OCF on 18 June 2026 at 10:04. No other brake tests results were provided. The operator supplied an invoice from MJS Express which showed a brake test for MY53 OCF and FJ69 ZWH dated 18 June 2026. The inspection of  KP60 ECW on 12 January 2026, was  pre annual test on 21 April 2026, which it failed. The declaration of roadworthiness was signed on 15 January 2026, but the sign off for the inspection completion was signed off on 23 April 2026. All the inspections appeared to be carried out by the same service provider.

Driver detectable defects were found during inspections, with no corresponding defect reports. Only two defect reports were submitted. The operator supplied wheel torque records for 5 months, but only one from February (FJ69 ZWH - 4 rear axle tyres replaced) and one from June (NX72 YWH) had anything recorded. All the other torque records show “no wheel removed or tyre replaced” and the month. There was no record of wheel torque checks at inspection other than a tick in the box. The Examiner pointed to a lack of effective auditing of maintenance records.

On the day before the hearing I was provided with addendum representations, which purported to be an attempt to “assist the Commissioner in advance of the hearing”. That appeared extremely unlikely given the late supply some 10 or 11 days after the Examiner’s reports, when it was late complying with Case Management Directions.  Representations confirmed that the operator is in possession of a single trailer C336518. The second trailer was disposed of on 5 December 2025.

The Vehicles are apparently fitted with tyre pressure monitoring systems to alert of a drop in tyre pressure. It was claimed that the maintenance provider checks the tyre pressures when conducting the Preventative Maintenance Inspections. The maintenance provider has now been asked to record the physical pressures and any adjustments. The operator attempted to claim that the Guide to Maintaining Roadworthiness does not state that tyre date codes need to be recorded when the Preventative Maintenance Inspection pro-forma clearly indicates: 8 Condition of Tyres (including age and date code). Instead, it referred to a tyre monitoring form. The operator has updated its torque and re-torque process. A torque register has been adopted for each vehicle with corresponding torque tags retained. The wheels were torqued on all vehicles and records were retained previously although it was accepted that record keeping was insufficient.

The operator ensures that Preventative Maintenance Inspections are completed at the start of each ISO week and was surprised to find that it had exceeded intervals. The operator thought there might have been a mix up. The issues identified with the dates on the Preventative Maintenance Inspection was attributed to Mr Folbigg. The operator will now monitor the forward planner more closely with an electronic alert set up to avoid the issue recurring. It was again accepted that brake testing regime did not meet expected standards. Roller brake tests have been implemented across the fleet and will now be laden at each Preventative Maintenance Inspection. No explanation was given against the Guide. It was claimed that the test failure for a defective headlight washer on KP60 ECW could have failed at any time and therefore there was no risk to road safety.

The operator claimed to have provided all driver licence checks to its solicitor. This failure was attributed to the bundling software. Nick Smith was said to have left in May 2026, and Lee Henry began driving in June 2026. The missing infringements were also said to have been scanned and sent to the solicitors using a single page scanner, so the infringements were missed. It attempted to introduce them now. I was unimpressed by the argument that leaving a card in a vehicle overnight creates no more than an administrative oversight. As the appellate Tribunal has commented, drivers’ hours compliance is fundamental to public safety. The failure to manage goes directly to the question about future compliance. In that context, I noted the absence of an explanation as to why vehicle unit downloads and missing mileage reports for KP60 ECW and FG70 XDH did not reach the Examiner even with an extended deadline. Yet further documents included a licence check of Alan Titmus, Minel Garboan, Rob Best, Nick Smith and Lee Henry. The infringement report for Mr Titmus dated 7 April 2026 suggested that he had left his card in the tachograph overnight and yet no printout was produced. The same excuse was given on the infringement report for Stewart Edmonds dated 16 March 2026. The endorsement of the reports was haphazard and not to the standard I would expect from an experienced Transport Manager.    

I heard evidence from Driver Foster. To his credit, he admitted that the above infringements resulted from a deliberate attempt and to avoid an accurate record of his driving. He referred to his previous clean driving history and how he had rebuilt his driving career with Stobarts. He is not currently driving as he recognised the same indicators which he said had led to the circumstances above. He referred to a deterioration in his mental health which had led him to use alcohol as a crutch.

Many of the offences identified by DVSA were connected to the hours of licensed premises. Concerningly, he indicated that he had not been subjected to drug or alcohol testing during his period of driving with this operator. This appeared to be yet another symptom of the Transport Manager’s abdication of responsibilities. He told me that his contact has been with “Andy”, the compliance manager. He was said to be downloading Mr Foster’s driver card once per week, but Mr Foster only signed 2 or 3 infringement reports in the whole time he was with the operator. Driver Foster did not disclose his problems to the operator and even now has not sought assistance from a medical professional. He presented expressing his remorse for what occurred and showing sufficient insight as to recognise the current risks to his mental health and decision-making. He has not undertaken any additional training since as he was not intending to renew his Diver CPC.

This is in contrast to Driver Titmus who has been retained by this operator. I referred to the two breaches: one was the result of carelessness, the other resulting from a failure to create an endorsement/ accurate record. He accepted that he was at fault. The benefit of his training was reflected in the diary entries produced since the start of 2026, where he accurately records start and finish times and attaches copies of endorsed printouts, should he be required to produce a further record. This is in addition to the running sheets which are retained in the vehicles.        

Mr Folbigg confirmed that he had delegated away his Transport Manager responsibilities to an Andrew Hitchin, who was described as the compliance manager but had no qualifications or formal training to carry out that role. He worked for the operator for 7 to 8 years with the last 3 in that role. When I asked why he was thought qualified, I was told that he was a friend. Mr Folbigg repeatedly referred to his own failure to exercise oversight, failing to recognise that as Transport Manager he was responsible for continuous and effective management.

The operator had intended to use Tructac but could not make it work form him. He now relies on Globofleet software. He was keen to explain the changes now implemented, many of them appeared to result from legal advice. He told me that prior to Mr Hitchin’s involvement, he had been downloading vehicle units and driver cards. He trusted Mr Hitchin to continue this. It was only after Mr Hitchin left that he discovered that he had not being doing this regularly or raising all relevant infringements with the drivers. In that regard he also failed as an operator to oversee how the Transport Manager duties were being exercised. Driver cards are now downloaded no later than 8 days, but some are weekly, depending on when he sees the driver. The vehicle units are downloaded every 6 weeks, no later than 2 months. He goes through the analysis with his daughter, Megan, identifying missing mileage, missing cards and annotating the records. He explained the points system for infringements which underpins the driver disciplinary process. This has been agreed by the drivers. Driver licence checks are undertaken every 28 days with extra checks required if a driver has attracted endorsements. He told me that drivers’ hours management had improved and that current infringements were mainly attributable to forgetfulness.

The operator had moved to brake tests at every Preventative Maintenance Inspection. He will raise the standard of inspection with the external contractor, which is based in his yard. The risk of drivers circumventing the driver defect system and taking defects straight to the contractor was emphasised during the hearing. He had not undertaken any training since 2016 and therefore found the two-day refresher training with the RHA to be useful, but he did not appear to have covered how to read a brake test printout. He intends to undertake some form of refresher every year. As with a number of claims made by the operator, training was not previously recorded. He admitted to exercising very poor judgement. He has committed to a monthly toolbox talk which will now be documented and Megan Folbigg will ensure that it is retained in a central file. Ms Folbigg assists the Transport Manager with a lot of his duties. She is the transport planner and is undertaking home studies, working towards gaining her own CPC. In the longer term she may apply to assume the role as Transport Manager. 

Written representations confirmed operation as a sole trader with the trading name T&A Freight. T&A Freight Ltd is a warehouse business for stock shortages and does not operate vehicles. He is involved in general haulage for third party trailers (mainly DX Freight and Menzies). Routes are planned by the customer. There are 8 full time drivers paid with PAYE with a low driver turnover. Self-employed drivers are no longer used. Driver training is now recorded. Tachograph reports are now produced by the Ms Folbigg. An infringement disciplinary policy has been implemented. I was provided with copies of: the certificate of attendance at the CPC refresher, Ms Folbigg’s course booking, a driver training matrix and example of Example of driver training, photograph of the driver notice board, the driver disciplinary policy, infringement tracker, and driver CPC tracker.

Determination

Operator and Transport Manager

Based on the evidence summarised above, I was satisfied that I should record the following adverse findings under the Act: 26(1)(b) – conditions on licence to notify changes, in this case relating to maintenance and to meet the licence requirements, 26(1)(e) – statements relating to inspection intervals, and to abide by conditions on the licence, 26(1)(f) – undertakings (vehicles to be kept fit and serviceable, effective driver defect reporting, complete maintenance records, drivers’ hours and tachographs).

The lack of financial standing represented a material change under section 26(1)(h). Based on the monies just invested, I was persuaded to allow a Period of Grace for 4 months to show financial standing. The operator was fully advised of the potential consequences if it fails to meet that mandatory and continuing requirement in the manner described by the Senior Traffic Commissioner in his document No. 2 of Finance. 

Affable as Mr Folbigg presented, the circumstances described above did not amount to effective and continuous management by Mr Folbbig. He was very frank in his admissions that he had abdicated his responsibilities to a person with no apparent qualifications. He was less able to provide any explanation as to why, except that Mr Hitchin was a friend. A Certificate of Professional Competence is meant to denote a level of professionalism. This is a business, not the playground. As the Senior Traffic Commissioner identifies in his Document No. 3 on Transport Manager, the Upper Tribunal has emphasised the: “need for a proper, active transport manager is not a mere formality but a serious requirement.” - 2017/023 Robert Arrowsmith trading as Arrowhead Contractors. A transport manager should not be one in name only but should actively discharge their duty to exercise continuous and effective management. A transport manager must always be more than just a transport manager in name only.  A transport manager risks their repute if they permit this situation and that was certainly the case with Mr Folbigg who came so very close to losing his ability to rely on his Certificate of Professional Competence.

Mr Harrington sought to impress on me the improvements made by the operator. Many of those were late in the day and the late provision of documents risked the impression that chaos remained. The operator was adamant that he was capable of exercising robust management. He referred to what he achieved before he had handed over the duties to Mr Hitchin. What appeared to be genuine surprise at the Examiners’ findings only further illustrated the lack of checks he had employed. I was presented with a situation where a finding against his repute as Transport Manager might lead to the loss of operator’s licence. In drawing back from that course, I was mindful of the caution expressed by the appellate tribunal in in 2017/55 Alistair Walter. Mr Folbigg had undoubtedly been foolish and reckless in his abandonment of his duties but, taking account of the positives above, I was concerned that any such finding would deliver a disproportionate outcome. His repute as a Transport Manager now hangs by the thinnest of threads, as was made very clear to him.

I weighed into the balance the offer of an undertaking; unusually and to maximise the weight I might attach, the operator offered a specific provider. I accepted that undertaking on the following terms:

The operator undertakes to instruct David Cooper of Prestige Transport Compliance & Training Ltd to carry out an audit of transport safety and compliance systems.  The audit will assess the systems for complying with the operator licence requirements, and the effectiveness with which those systems are implemented. The audit should cover at least the applicable elements detailed in the guidance on Operator Compliance Audits: www.gov.uk/government/publications/operator-compliance-audits 

A copy of the report together with the operator’s detailed proposals for implementing the report’s recommendations is to be uploaded to the licence record via the Vehicle Operator Licensing self-service account, or, if the operator does not have a self-service account, emailed to notifications@vehicle-operator-licensing.service.gov.uk  by 30 January 2027. 

Having stepped back from the ultimate regulatory intervention, I identified the need for deterrent action with the purpose of ensuring that compliance is sustained. I took evidence as to the impact of regulatory intervention, but the direction was intended to have an impact which would discourage a repeat of the type of amateurish behaviour described. I therefore curtailed the licence to 8 vehicles and 5 trailers, with effect from 23:45 on 14 July 2026. The operator was given 7 days to return the relevant discs to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner in Cambridge. Repute was only just retained.   

Driver Conduct

The relevant legislation is set out in Sections 110-122 of The Road Traffic Act 1988. The legislation draws a clear distinction between Large Goods Vehicle (LGV) licence holders and applicants and Passenger Carrying Vehicle (PCV) licence holders and applicants. Section 112 of the 1988 Act provides that the Secretary of State shall not grant to an applicant a LGV driver’s licence or a PCV driver’s licence unless he is satisfied, having regard to his conduct, that he is a fit person to hold the licence applied for. It is section 121(1) which defines conduct -  in relation to an applicant for or the holder of a LGV driver’s licence or the holder of a UK licence for the Community, his conduct as a driver of a motor vehicle.

As the Administrative Court, on the application of Meredith and Others EWHC 2975 (Admin) 18 explained that, whilst the personal circumstances of the driver are, at the preliminary stage of consideration of fitness, irrelevant to the question whether his conduct as a driver has been such as to make him unfit, save to the extent that those circumstances concern his conduct as a driver. Personal circumstances which go to mitigate the conduct itself (such as illness, or emergency, or momentary lapse of attention, or carelessness) will be relevant, while personal circumstances which would, in the ordinary sentencing exercise by a criminal court go to mitigation of penalty (such as loss of work, or other hardship, or the dependence of others upon the licence-holder) would not.

The Court in Meredith did not go on to consider the applicability of the principle of deterrence, which was considered by the Court of Session in Thomas Muir (Haulage) Limited v The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions [1999] SC 86, but regulatory action undoubtedly contributes to achieving of the purpose of the legislation.

Mr Foster admitted the large number of infringements and false records. With that level of persistent and habitual offending, the Senior Traffic Commissioner identifies a 4-week suspension per offence. I noted the absence of further reports. Mr Foster described some moving personal circumstances. He was encouraged to seek assistance to help him with future strategies. As he clearly identified, he presents a current risk to road safety. In those circumstances I determined that I must revoke and disqualify him from holding the vocational entitlement. I advised him that I would need to alert DVLA Medical Branch to undiagnosed condition(s).  

I was able to distinguish the position of Mr Titmus. As described above, one infringement was ascribed to forgetfulness. There will be no excuse for a recurrence where his card is left in the unit overnight. It was accepted by the Examiner that the  other offence could easily have been avoided by the proper completion of an endorsement. That occurred in a culture where the operator had delegated away the checking of driver records. In stark contrast, Mr Titmus illustrated what he does now. I therefore issued him with a formal warning that he must meet the standards expected of a professional driver going forward.

R Turfitt

Traffic Commissioner

16 July 2026

Published 5 August 2026