Decision for Skip Time Limited (OK2075467)
Source: gov.uk (2025-06-16)

Written decision of the Traffic Commissioner for the South East and Metropolitan area for Skip Time Limited

IN THE SOUTH EASTERN & METROPOLITAN TRAFFIC AREA.

SKIP TIME LIMITED OK2075467 (under consideration).

PUBLIC INQUIRY on 15 APRIL 2025

GOODS VEHICLES (LICENSING OF OPERATORS) ACT 1995

GOODS VEHICLES (LICENSING OF OPERATORS) REGULATIONS 1995

TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER’S WRITTEN DECISION

T C DECISION

The application by Skip Time Limited OK2075467 for a Standard National licence authorising 4 vehicles is refused because I remain to be satisfied that it meets the mandatory requirements under section 13A(2) of the 1995 Act – good repute, financial standing and professional competence.

The good repute of former transport manager Mark Jones is tarnished but not lost upon receipt of his undertaking that he is now retired and will not seek to be nominated again.

Written Reasons (short form)

The full history is set out in the Preliminary Hearing papers, bundle and transcript and the Public Inquiry papers. I do not repeat it here, save as material to my decision. At a preliminary hearing on 27 February 2025, I issued the decision and reasons (confirmed in writing the following day) set out in Annex A attached. For the avoidance of doubt Mr OShea McDuffus has known (actual knowledge) since 27 February 2025 that he and Skip Time Limited have no authority to operate any vehicle over 3.5t.

On 11 March 2025, the Applicant’s sole director Mr OShea McDuffus wrote to OTC: “I’m not longer interested if trying to get the O license so I don’t feel the need to attend the public enquiry”. The same day OTC notified my decision as follows:

There was an interim Licence for a period and that is why I called it to PI. The Operator was on notice that regulatory action was under consideration and thereafter that the application may be refused. The former TM is also called to the hearing because of some of the arrangements notified (payment). I do not accept withdrawal of the application at this late stage. Hearing to proceed. The director is reminded that he must still submit the documents set out in the case management directions.

The public inquiry commenced and concluded on 15 April 2025 in the absence of Mr McDuffus. I heard oral evidence from Mark Jones who was the nominated transport manager during the time an interim was in place and Mr Michael Johnson who was previously nominated as a transport manager on the application. I notified Mr Jones and Mr Johnson of their decisions and said I would issue a short-written decision regarding the application. Communications between OTC Eastbourne and Mr McDuffus subsequent to the early exchange above demonstrates that he was fully aware of the potential consequences if he failed to attend.

Every director has a statutory duty under sections 173 and 174 of Companies Act 2006 to exercise independent judgement, reasonable skill care and diligence. My decision is also based on clear Upper Tribunal authority on what is expected of applicants and operators, whether as individuals or as part of a limited company. The relevant authorities and principles here are that:

• Operators, Transport Managers and those advising them are deemed to have knowledge of the advice and Guidance in the public domain, as per in 2012/030 MGM Haulage & Recycling Limited.

• A Traffic Commissioner is entitled to treat the conduct of the Sole Director effectively as the conduct of the Limited Company and repute or fitness is determined accordingly. Such an approach has received approval from the appellate tribunal on a number of occasions, such as 2013/008 Vision Travel International Limited and T2013/61 Alan Michael Knight.

Mr McDuffus failed to submit any additional evidence as required by the case management directions on 27 February 2025. This prevented me from forming a complete understanding of the full compliance (or non-compliance) during the Time Limited Interim. This is not only to the detriment of the applicant but also Mark Jones as there may have been elements which were more helpful one or both. The limited analysis we were able to do on 15 April 2025 found further issues such as (i) vehicle GN15OHH subsequently had a cherished plate (W2WEY) but VOL was not updated, and the tacho was not recalibrated under that new plate; and (ii) Driver Andrew Warren was not recording all his duty (Mr Jones said that Mr Warren is a relation – possibly brother in law - of Mr McDuffus). Financial standing was insufficient as at the Preliminary Hearing and nothing further was received for the Public Inquiry. It follows I remain to be satisfied Skip Time Limited meets financial standing. In the absence of Mr McDuffus, it was not possible to make any determinations of professional competence because understanding the director/transport manager dynamic is key.

From the evidence (and absence of evidence) above, I find that Mr OShea McDuffus made a false declaration when he signed the application on 26 July 2024, which includes the following: -

I declare that the statements of fact or expectation provided in support of this application are correct.

I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that they have the required experience and training prior to making an application for an operator’s licence. I confirm that by signing this application that I understand the responsibilities and requirements of holding a goods vehicle operator’s licence and will ensure that I will keep updated on those requirements.

The additional records should have been submitted even if Mr McDuffus did not want to attend. The findings of breach of conditions and undertakings made on 27 February 2025 remain relevant here. Trust lies at the heart of operator licensing. All the evidence to date strongly indicates Mr McDuffus cannot be trusted and does not have the ability or intent to oversee any business which holds an operator licence. It is appropriate and proportionate for this application to be refused as a marker for any future attempts by Mr McDuffus to obtain a Licence or be involved in the management, administration or control of any entity that holds or obtains such a Licence. Accordingly, I have reached the decision set out in paragraph 1 above.

Mr Jones admitted that he should have been more robust in ensuring all records were produced to him and more diligent with the ones that he did see. Accordingly, I reached the decision set out in paragraph 2 above. The one time proposed transport manager Michael Johnson was the subject of formal advice from me on 15 April 2025, particularly in the separation of external transport manager and consultancy roles. Mr Johnson gave an undertaking to attend practical training before applying to be a transport manager again.

Decision repeated for the purposes of web browsing only.

MISS SARAH BELL

TRAFFIC COMMISSIONER FOR GREAT BRITAIN

Issued: 28 May 2025