Decision for TCG Logistic Ltd (OH2006089)
Source: gov.uk (2025-02-18)

Written decision of the Traffic Commissioner for the West of England for TCG Logistic Ltd and Shaun Masson, transport manager.

WESTERN TRAFFIC AREA

TCG LOGISTIC LIMITED OH2006089

SHAUN MASSON – TRANSPORT MANAGER

AT A PUBLIC INQUIRY IN BRISTOL, 7 JANUARY 2024

DECISION

The Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995 (as amended) (“the Act”)

Following a finding that the operator is no longer of sufficient financial standing, Section 27(1) is made out and the licence is revoked.

To allow for an orderly winding down and compliance with any contracted obligations, revocation will take effect from 23:59 hours, 29 March 2025.

The good repute of Shaun Masson as transport manager is tarnished but not lost.

I issue a formal warning to operator and transport manager for allocating a job to a driver when that allocation should not have been made leading to a bridge strike.

BACKGROUND

TCG Logistic Ltd is the holder of a standard international goods vehicle operator’s licence authorising the use of seven vehicles and ten trailers from an operating centre in Romsey. The sole director is Tiberius Gheorgiu. The transport manager (from August 2024) is Shaun Masson.

The company was called to a public inquiry in July 2024 due to maintenance concerns. The decision was as follows:

Financial standing is not satisfied. Section 27(1)(a) is made out. I provide a period of grace until 15 November 2024 for it to be re-established on a permanent basis.

Tiberius Gheorghiu has lost his good repute as transport manager. He is disqualified from acting as such for twelve months and until he can show that he has worked under the tutorship of another transport manager for at least three months.

The licence is without professional competence and s.27(1)(a) is again made out. I provide a period of grace of three months for that to be rectified. Undertakings All equipment will be subject to a roller brake test at, or up to seven days before, every safety inspection with, as a minimum, alternate tests conducted laden.

All drivers will be directly employed with tax and national insurance deducted at source, paid holiday leave and appropriate pension contributions made.

By 11 November 2024, Tiberius Gheorghiu will attend in person an operator licence management training course.

The operator will arrange an independent audit to be carried out by a DVSA-authorised audit provider, the RHA, Logistics UK or other suitable equivalent independent body, by 11 January 2025. The audit will assess the systems for complying with maintenance and/or drivers hours requirements, and the effectiveness with which those systems are implemented. A copy of the audit report, together with the operator’s detailed proposals for implementing the report’s recommendations, must be sent to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner in Bristol by 25 January 2025.

I received notification from Hampshire Police of a bridge strike involving one of the company’s vehicles in Romsey on 24 September 2024. The driver was Daniel Walters. Mr Walters had left the operating centre carrying a taller than normal refrigerated container. The running height was 14’ 6”; the bridge was 14’ 3”. He had slowed before making contact with the bridge. I was concerned to note that the driver’s wife had a serious medical appointment that day and had requested to stay local so he could be on hand if necessary. Unfortunately he had instead been sent on a run to the Midlands and it seemed that preyed on his mind. I called the driver to a conduct hearing. Having noted the driver’s circumstances, that the company did not appear to assist in setting routes and that there was a policy to keep all height markers set to 14’ 6” regardless of trailer height, I decided to call the company to a conjoined preliminary hearing. That decision was in October.

The company failed to re-establish financial standing by 15 November 2024 as was required under the terms of the period of grace. Exceptionally, due to the already listed hearings in relation to the bridge strike, rather than revoking the licence on expiry of the grace period as I was entitled to do, I upgraded the preliminary hearing to a public inquiry for both operator and Shaun Masson as transport manager.

THE PUBLIC INQUIRY

Tiberius Gheorghiu and Shaun Masson attended for the operator. Daniel Walters attended for his conduct hearing. Compliance documents had been provided in advance.

Proceedings were recorded and a transcript can be made available if necessary. I record here only that which is necessary to support the findings made.

Driver Daniel Walters

The main points of Mr Walter’s evidence related to his wife’s health. He had thought he had picked up a different trailer that morning as he had misread the message he had been sent. Most trailers were 14’ 1” but that one was taller. He had been put on a shorter daily rest. He got back after a long day the previous day at about 8pm. He came in around 5 the next morning and it wasn’t fully light. He had only been thinking about his wife’s appointment and whether or not he would make it back in time.

Mr Walters had an otherwise completely clear record. He had made the operator aware of his wife’s appointment and his need to attend. I find that he should not have been allocated to that job that day. I issued him with a formal warning.

The evidence of Shaun Masson

Mr Masson had worked in transport since 2019, starting as a risk and compliance officer. He had a full-time job with Oxalis. I asked how Mr Masson oversaw scheduling at TCG. I was told that he had nothing to do with allocating vehicles and loads to drivers. His primary concern was ensuring compliance with the drivers hours rules. Drivers had direct contact with IDT.

I asked Mr Masson about an unusual prohibition issued to a trailer at “Donnington” on 13 September 2024. The trailer had four wheel arches recorded as “wing badly holed not acting as a complete shield”. Mr Masson couldn’t tell me at which “Donnington” the encounter took place. I asked about the investigation. I received a rather general response.

Evidence of Tiberius Gheorghiu

Mr Gheorghiu told me that the shipping schedule had caused more pressure on the operation that week. He accepted that he was aware of the medical appointment but had got confused on the date. Work was allocated by IDT (the primary contractor). Had Mr Walters got held up, he would have provided a relief driver.

It was accepted that financial standing was not satisfied. Work had dropped off. The bridge strike had taken a vehicle out of use. Recovery cost £6,500 and he had to pay for Network Rail to attend. The insurance had not yet paid out. The insurance renewal had increased by £10,000 as a result of the bridge strike.

The Donnington referred to was at the services on the M1. The driver had forgotten on an earlier occasion to reset the ride height on the trailer resulting in the wheel arches rubbing against the tyres. It was a newish trailer and the driver had just made a stupid mistake.

We discussed the financial position and I concluded the situation was inevitable. I noted that compliance was generally good. Drivers were away all week and it was difficult to manage them in that period.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Financial standing has not been restored. I made the formal finding that it was not satisfied in July 2024. Article 13(1)(c) of EU Regulation 1071/2009 (the “EU Regulation”), as retained in UK law gives the power to allow a period of grace and permits “a time limit not exceeding 6 months where the requirement of financial standing is not satisfied, in order to demonstrate that that requirement will again be satisfied on a permanent basis”

The effect of the reference to a permanent basis is that an operator can only have a period of grace once. The maximum period has now passed and revocation is mandatory pursuant to Section 27(1) of the Act.

I further find as a fact that:

• Driver Walters should not have been allocated the duty that he was on 24 September 2024 and that was the root cause of the bridge strike. Operators and transport managers must have regard to the personal circumstances of drivers when allocating work.

• The arrangement whereby IDT allocated the work directly to drivers increases the risk of both matters such as the bridge strike and of other concerns – I noted one driver repeatedly driving over 90 hours in a fortnight, for example. Such an arrangement is not unusual and I am not saying that it is not acceptable. However, it needs to be considered within an overall risk assessment and procedures put in place to mitigate the risks arising.

• The company had a policy of leaving all height markers set at 14’ 6” regardless of the height of the trailer. On the face of it, that might seem sensible provided that all trailers are less than 14’ 6”. However, it was clear in this case that the drivers knew, or thought They knew, the actual running heights of the trailers and drove to that, not the marker. The company policy had the effect of negating the value of the in-cab markers and was contributory to the bridge strike.

• Drivers were not provided with risk-assessed routes. I note that there is more difficulty in doing that with an operation that does not have regular routes but, in those cases, drivers need more support and the correct tools.

• Where a company has an external transport manager, Article 4(2)(b) of the EU Regulation requires that the transport manager conduct certain specified tasks including “the assignment of loads or services to drivers and vehicles”. Mr Masson did not undertake that task either directly or indirectly.

• Mr Masson did not ensure that the company provided evidence of its financial standing within the 15 November 2024 deadline. Amongst the mandatory tasks within the EU Regulation is “basic accounting”. Anyone who has sat a transport manager examination will know that there is considerable focus on finances. Mr Masson had a duty to ensure the notification of the financial position before expiry of the period of grace.

• Mr Masson had not carried out a full and effective investigation in to the root cause of the multiple prohibitions issued on 13 September 2024.

There are many positives in this case. Use of self-employed or “LTD” drivers has stopped. Compliance, from a brief review of the records, is generally sound.

Mr Gheorghiu appears to have made significant efforts to repay a shortfall with HMRC and to re-establish financial standing. It seems that the bridge-strike removed any chance of achieving that but I record for the record that Mr Gheorghiu’s good repute as an operator remains intact. Whether that remains the case should he make a new application will depend heavily on how the business is managed from this point onwards and, specifically, whether there is any attempt to avoid the Crown liabilities.

Mr Masson failed to exert sufficient control over the allocation of duties to drivers and that contributed to the bridge strike. In balancing that, I note that he appears to have had a positive impact on the business in his relatively short tenure. I am sure he will have found the public inquiry process educational. I find his good repute is tarnished but remains intact.

DECISIONS

Following a finding that the operator is no longer of sufficient financial standing, Section 27(1) is made out and the licence is revoked.

To allow for an orderly winding down and compliance with any contracted obligations, revocation will take effect from 23:59 hours, 29 March 2025.

The good repute of Shaun Masson as transport manager is tarnished but not lost.

I issue a formal warning for allocating a job to a driver when that allocation should not have been made leading to a bridge strike.

Kevin Rooney

Traffic Commissioner

3 February 2025