Decision for South Dorset Coaches Ltd (PH1065314) and Nicholas Hubbard – Transport Manager
Source: gov.uk (2025-07-14)

Written Decision of the Traffic Commissioner for Western England for South Dorset Coaches Ltd (PH1065314) and Nicholas Hubbard – Transport Manager

In the Western Traffic Area

South Dorset Coaches Ltd (PH1065314) and Nicholas Hubbard – Transport Manager

Public Inquiry held in Bristol, 4 March 2025 and 1 May 2025

Written Decision of the Traffic Commissioner

DECISION

PUBLIC PASSENGER VEHICLES ACT 1981 (the “1981 Act”)

Adverse findings are made under Section 17(3)(b), financial standing and Section 17(3)(c) prohibitions issued. I issue a formal warning to the company in relation to the failure to maintain financial standing and the maintenance shortcomings. I issue a formal warning to Mr Hubbard personally of the need to ensure that everything said to a traffic commissioner is true and correct.

The application to add Nicholas Hubbard as transport manager is granted.

Undertakings are recorded:

Each safety inspection will include an associated roller brake test

By 31 December 2025, the technician who signs the declaration of roadworthiness will achieve an irtec inspection technician licence with evidence uploaded to the licence record within 14 days.

By 31 August 2025, the operator will erect a covered inspection facility with evidence uploaded to the licence record within 14 days.

BACKGROUND

South Dorset Coaches Ltd is the holder of a standard national public service vehicle operator’s licence authorising the use of three vehicles from an operating centre in Wareham. This licence started in 2007. The transport manager is Jeremy Hubbard. The director is Nicholas Hubbard.

Nicholas Hubbard and Anne Hubbard were directors of Swanage Taxis Ltd which held a standard national licence authorising seven vehicles from 1994. The licence fell to be continued at the end of February 2024. Correspondence around the continuation process identified a lack of financial standing. The operator was invited to surrender that licence but no surrender was received. The licence was revoked on 26 April 2024. That revocation triggered a request for finances and a maintenance investigation on this entity.

DVSA provided a maintenance report which showed significant shortcomings including that vehicles were inspected by an unqualified technician with no undercover facilities. The operator offered assurances to DVSA and an undertaking for an independent compliance audit to me and the maintenance investigation was closed with a warning.

The finances provided were short of that required and there was evidence of failed payments. In November 2024, I became aware that Swanage Taxis Ltd had entered insolvent liquidation. I called this entity to public inquiry, delayed to allow the compliance audit to be available. An application to add Nicholas Hubbard as transport manager was held in abeyance pending the hearing.

Mr Nicholas Hubbard was called separately to consider his good repute and professional competence as transport manager.

THE PUBLIC INQUIRY

Nicholas Hubbard attended the first day of the inquiry represented by Andrew Banks, Stone King solicitors. Compliance documents were provided in advance along with written submissions. Proceedings were recorded and I do not recount the full evidence here.

Financial standing was not satisfied and I granted a period of grace.

In giving his oral evidence, it became apparent that Mr Hubbard was making statements that were plainly untrue. It was not clear whether he was mistaken in his recollection of events or whether it was a more deliberate action. I adjourned the inquiry to allow reflection on what had been said and for Mr Hubbard to be provided with the full set of relevant documents to refresh his memory.

The hearing reconvened on 1 May 2025. Also present on this second hearing was Anne Hubbard. In his evidence, Mr Hubbard accepted that he had made a mistake in his evidence given on the first day. Part of that was due to mis-remembering dates and part was because his transport manager application had been made by his wife on his behalf.

Financial standing was now satisfied.

I remained concerned at the events leading to the liquidation of Swanage Taxis Ltd. I was told that an error by the accountants had led them to make claims for furlough payments during the Covid period which HMRC now said were not valid. There was no supporting evidence for that statement so I allowed a further period of time to allow whatever was available to be provided.

Post public inquiry submissions

Final closing submissions were received on 15 May 2025. I was told that Swanage Taxis had been unable to repay the furlough payments when their return had been demanded by HMRC. In relation to applying for the furlough payments in the first place, Mr Banks’ submissions say the following:

“The original furlough payments claim was at a chaotic time during the Covid 19 pandemic when developments in Government support and many other matters were fast paced. The application was made on SWL behalf by an accountant. They sought advice from him when the clawback claim was made. They acted properly.”

In supporting evidence is a letter from MKL accountants. That takes the form of a number of questions and answers which it is necessary for me to set out here in full:

“Where did the advice to apply for furlough payments come from?
- When furlough was first announced, our firm was processing the payroll for Swanage Taxis Limited. We undertook to process the relevant furlough claims for all our payroll clients as part of the payroll process.
Did you assisting the applications, and did you believe that they were permissible?
- We filed the relevant notices as part of the payroll process for the period that we dealt with their payroll, and it was our belief for that period that the claims were correct and permissible.
Did there come a point in time when the applications for continued further payments were taken in house by STL?
- The company took over operating the payroll from April 2021
When the claim came for a clawback of the payments did HMRC explain why they were not entitled to the payments?
- We were not doing with the payroll at that time, so we had forward the relevant correspondence to the company. Our understanding is that HMRC’s overall issue was that the company was not able to provide evidence of the claim calculations for the period that they dealt with the payroll themselves and disallowed the entire claim.
When STL encountered financial difficulties did you advise that the company should liquidate?
- Following HMRC’s initial decision to claw back of the furlough, we had various discussions on the viability of the company and the possible question of having to wind the company up if they would not take a sensible view on the matter.”
CONSIDERATION AND FINDINGS OF FACT

The maintenance and compliance matters are not now such as to warrant significant regulatory action. I take it from paragraphs 14 – 16 of the first statement of Mr Hubbard that I am offered undertakings for roller brake testing, covered inspection facilities and irtec training for one technician.

Financial standing was not satisfied at he first hearing and I granted a period of grace until the second where it was. The operator is on notice that a period of grace for finance can only be granted once. If the company is found to be deficient again, revocation is mandatory.

I find that Nicholas Hubbard did not deliberately lie nor intend to mislead me when he gave untrue evidence at the first hearing.

The final question is whether Nicholas Hubbard was party to deliberate false claims for furlough payments in 2021 leading to an HMRC demand for their return and subsequent liquidation of Swanage Taxis Ltd which had a deficiency to the tax-payer of in excess of £160,000, that being £77,159 in respect of the furlough payments and £82,555 of a CBILS loan, plus some element of £59,943 owed to Lloyds Bank Plc which is recorded as BBL/overdraft.

I was told that the company had been in a position to repay the bank loans in the normal course of trading. I have no evidence of whether or not that was true. Assuming it was, the entire shortfall becomes due to the situation with respect to the furlough payments. That is where matters become somewhat opaque.

The operator’s evidence is that the accountants were responsible for the errors, whatever they were, which led to HMRC’s reclaim of the furlough payments. The accountants’ evidence is that the errors were made after they had ceased to manage the payroll. Neither statement is actually supported by any evidence at all.

I must make my findings to the civil standard, that is, is it more likely than not that a concern is made out. However, in practice it is more nuanced than that. Where an allegation is more serious, then the caselaw requires that the evidence be more cogent. The outcome of a finding that Mr Hubbard deliberately mis-claimed furlough payments would almost certainly be the loss of his good repute and the revocation of this licence with the inevitable failure of the business to follow.

I have had the benefit of hearing from both Mr and Mrs Hubbard. Whilst I found that he did not speak the truth to me during the first hearing, I further found that not to have been deliberate. Having assessed the credibility of each of them, I find that, on the balance of probabilities, they did not deliberately mis-claim furlough payments.

DECISIONS

Adverse findings are made under Section 17(3)(b), financial standing and Section 17(3)(c) prohibitions issued. I issue a formal warning to the company in relation to the failure to maintain financial standing and the maintenance shortcomings. I issue a formal warning to Mr Hubbard personally of the need to ensure that everything said to a traffic commissioner is true and correct.

The application to add Nicholas Hubbard as transport manager is granted.

Undertakings are recorded:

Each safety inspection will include an associated roller brake test

By 31 December 2025, the technician who signs the declaration of roadworthiness will achieve an irtec inspection technician licence with evidence uploaded to the licence record within 14 days.

By 31 August 2025, the operator will erect a covered inspection facility with evidence uploaded to the licence record within 14 days.

Kevin Rooney Traffic Commissioner 23 June 2025