Decision for Rubbish Hunters Limited (OK1131211)
Written decision of the Deputy Traffic Commissioner in the South Easter and Metropolitan area for Rubbish Hunters Ltd
SOUTH EASTERN AND METROPOLITAN AREA
DECISION OF THE DEPUTY TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER
PUBLIC INQUIRY HEARD AT IVY HOUSE, IVY TERRACE, EASTBOURNE ON 27 NOVEMBER 2025
OK1131211 RUBBISH HUNTERS LIMITED
Findings
Grounds found to consider regulatory action as detailed in the call-up letter under Sections 26 (1) (c) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995 – prohibitions issued - Section 26 (1 Section 26 (1) (f) – not honouring undertakings, Section 26 (1) (h) – material change – no longer fit to hold a licence or able to show sufficient finances to ensure vehicles are kept in a fit and serviceable condition.
Decision
Licence revoked with immediate effect in accordance with Section 26 (1) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995.
Direction - Any applications made by this operator or any that involve the director Sukhdev Singh shall be referred to a Traffic Commissioner for consideration.
Background
The operator Rubbish Hunters Limited is the holder of a restricted licence authorising ten vehicles granted on the 2 September 2014. The licence is subject to standard undertakings plus a requirement for laden brake tests to be carried out at each preventative maintenance inspection and a requirement to engage a transport consultant for at least four hours each month.
The operator was called to a public inquiry on the 4 September 2019 following an unsatisfactory maintenance investigation. The licence was curtailed for three months and the undertakings set out in paragraph 1 were agreed. On the 17 February 2021 an increase in authorisation to ten vehicles was agreed and confirmation of the involvement of a transport consultant was shown.
During 2023 issues arose in relation to the availability of an operating centre and a period of grace was allowed and authorisation for a new site granted on the 7 July 2023. Following a second unsatisfactory maintenance investigation a public inquiry was held on the 18 March 2024. Adverse findings were made, and the licence was curtailed to seven vehicles for six weeks. A new operating centre at Fray’s Farm Uxbridge was approved and undertakings were agreed which were subsequently complied with.
On 22 April 2024 a letter was sent to the company advising that the Traffic Commissioner had received complaints against the use of the operating centre. The issues raised include environmental concerns such as noise, dust, pollution, skip chains making lots of noise and the unsuitability of the narrow road and the danger to other road users and pedestrians. The letter asked the company to provide an explanation, by 13 May 2024, of any actions they would take to ensure the continued suitability of the site and to lessen the impact on residents.
A Traffic Examiner visited the site in May 2024 and prepared a report which was submitted to the Traffic Commissioner who decided that a formal review of the suitability of the operating centre would be conducted. The operator was contacted and provided details of operating hours and frequency of movements to and from the site. Taking these into account a proposal for additional conditions was made in February 2025. No response was received regarding the proposed conditions despite two additional letters being sent.
On 17 March 2025 Ramandeep Dhaliwal removed himself as director using the online service and added Sukhdev Singh as a director. A letter was sent to the company on 27 May 2025 asking for an explanation as to why Mr Singh was appointed as a director on Companies House on 3 November 2024, but this was not notified until 17 March 2025. The letter also requested finances, evidence of compliance with the undertakings for laden roller brakes at every PMI, the employment of a transport consultant plus an explanation of how Mr Singh will ensure compliance when he lives in Italy. A response from Mr Singh was uploaded online on 24 June 2025, in which he blamed the delay in notifying his directorship to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner on Companies House who only confirmed his appointment on 17 March 2025. He stated that although his current residential address is in Italy, he would be relocating to the UK in the summer. He confirmed he now has a user account online in relation to the operator’s licence. He stated that finances will be submitted and confirmed that the company were complying with the undertakings. To date no evidence of finances or compliance with the undertakings has been received.
A decision was made to call the operator to inquiry to undertake the review of the operating centre suitability, determine the role being played by the new director and the compliance or otherwise with the undertakings on the licence. A hearing was arranged for the 29 October 2025 at a venue close to the authorised operating centre but an application requesting an adjournment was received from the operator prior to this date saying that there had been insufficient time to prepare for a hearing. As additional documentation had also been sent by one of the residents, an adjournment was agreed until the 27 November 2025.
Prior to the 27 November 2025 both the residents who had lodged the complaints contacted the Office of the Traffic Commissioner to say that it appeared that the operator was no longer trading from the site. Consequently, they stated that they would not be attending the inquiry. Attempts were made to contact the operator to clarify the situation, but no response was received.
The Public Inquiry
Nobody attended the public inquiry, but I was satisfied that notice of the hearing had been properly sent to the operator at the addresses provided by them. I therefore proceeded in their absence.
Findings and Decisions
In this case the suitability of the operating centre remains in doubt, but I decline to make any findings in that regard having not heard from the residents or the operator. I remind myself that the site was found suitable when the licence was granted and continued use may have been allowed if conditions had been added to the licence.
I find that there are grounds to consider directing that the licence is revoked, suspended or curtailed as detailed in the call-up letter under Sections 26 (1) (c) of the Act – prohibitions issued -Section 26 Section 26 (1) (f) – not honouring undertakings and Section 26 (1) (h) – material change – no longer of fitness to hold a licence or able to show sufficient finances to ensure vehicles are in a fit and serviceable condition. In the absence of any evidence from the operator to the contrary I find that the appropriate decision is to revoke the licence with immediate effect in accordance with the Section 26 on the grounds as stated. In particular, the absence of financial evidence is a key finding in the decision to revoke the licence.
I have considered whether to order a period of disqualification in respect of the operator and the current director of the company but have decided against this. To make such an order in the absence of the operator would be unusual and the main fault of the current director seems to be lack of communication as opposed to non-compliance leading to road safety or fair competition concerns. I do however, direct that any applications made by this operator or any that involve the director Sukhdev Singh shall be referred to a Traffic Commissioner for consideration.
John Baker
Deputy Traffic Commissioner
9 December 2025