Decision for Keith Board t/a Keith Board Transport (OH2010553)
Source: gov.uk (2025-01-31)

Written decision of the Traffic Commissioner for the West of England for Keith Board t/a Keith Board Transport and transport manager Thomas Keal

WESTERN TRAFFIC AREA

KEITH BOARD t/a KEITH BOARD TRANSPORT OH2010553

THOMAS KEAL – TRANSPORT MANAGER

AT A PUBLIC INQUIRY IN BRISTOL, 9 JANUARY 2025

DECISION

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

Keith Board has lost his good repute and is without professional competence. The licence is revoked pursuant to Section 27(1).

Keith Board is disqualified from applying for or holding an operator’s licence in Great Britain until 22 January 2030.

The good repute of Thomas Keal is unblemished.

BACKGROUND

Keith Board is the holder of a standard international operator’s licence authorised for one vehicle and one trailer granted in March 2018. The operating centre is in Crewkerne, Somerset. One vehicle is in possession. The transport manager from January 2024 until 1 October 2024 was Thomas Keal. Prior to that, it was John Lyons.

The operator has compliance history. On 5 April 2023, this operator was requested by DVSA to send relevant compliance documentation to allow the enforcement agency to conduct a desk-based assessment. Documentation should have been received by 26 April. No response was forthcoming. Following a brief exchange with the then transport manager, Mr Lyons, DVSA then chose to visit the operator. Traffic Enforcement Manager Andrew Ball attended on 7 July 2023 and Mr Ball completed his report on 10 July. Each area of non-compliance on the report generates a points score. Anything more than ten points generates a referral to my office. This operator scored forty-four. I made the decision to call the company to public inquiry to consider the compliance concerns. In parallel, I asked DVSA to conduct an investigation on another operator for whom Mr Lyons was acting as transport manager. The public inquiry took place on 13 December 2023. The outcome was as follows:

John William Lyons has forfeited his good repute as transport manager and is disqualified from acting as such until 19 July 2024 and until he has attended a further 2-day refresher course hosted by a transport manager CPC examination centre.

Pursuant to an adverse finding under s.26(1)(f), that the rules on drivers hours and tachographs were not observed, the licence is curtailed to one vehicle and one trailer immediately and indefinitely.

Thomas Keal is accepted as transport manager.

Undertakings were added:

An audit shall be conducted by a competent independent person by 19 October 2024. The scope of the audit shall include systems for the management of maintenance, driver licencing, drivers hours and working time and the role of the transport manager in line with the requirements of EU Regulation 1071/2009 and STC Guidance. The audit report will be prepared, acted upon and retained for at least 2 years. A copy of the report together with the operator’s plans for implementing any recommendations will be forwarded to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner by 30 October 2024.

The operator will engage the services of Logico to provide digital driver defect reporting, for tachograph analysis and to conduct quarterly compliance reviews with the operator and the transport manager, the first to take place by 19 February 2024. The operator may seek to be released from this undertaking after one year but only if there is strong independent evidence of a good degree of compliance.

Having described the operation as having been in “chaos”, I commented in my decision as follows:

“I put Mr Board on notice that should Mr Keal leave, or should I become aware that support from Logico is discontinued, he is likely to be recalled to public inquiry. He has come as close to revocation and disqualification as it is possible to come; the smallest matter could well tip the scales the other way. The previous failings remain on record. This decision does not wipe the slate clean; quite the opposite, in fact.”

When Mr Keal resigned as transport manager on 1 October, the standard loss of transport manager letter was sent. Mr Board responded on 22 October and the following is an extract:

“I myself only received my transport manager’s resignation recently. The first knowledge of the resignation was when yourselves contacted me and I have been trying to source a new one in the meantime.

I have worked so hard to bring Keith Board Transport up to compliance and the loss of my transport manager has really hit me hard. I have just completed another Audit with my compliance company logico and all was present and correct so I felt a sense of pride that I have managed to achieve so much in such a short time and now I feel this was all for nothing. It transpires that Tom finds it very difficult to attend to the needs of the company due to me being away for three weeks at any one time. I have explained to Tom that he could have simply made arrangements with my wife to visit the office and liaise with her as she deals with all of my paperwork when she is not working.

Mr John Lyons (previous Transport Manager) and myself have remained in touch as we have been friends for many years and My Lyons and myself know exactly where we went wrong last time prompting the public inquiry. We have both realised that the old school ways were not acceptable and have both learnt a lot from the process. Mr Lyons even after the inquiry has now willingly offered to stand in again as an interim Transport Manager as I will be undertaking the Transport Managers course myself. Mr Lyons has recently sat an updated course himself.”

Mr Board requested a period of grace to replace his transport manager. I am always concerned when an operator appears not to have noticed that the person exerting continuous and effect management of the transport operation has stopped working for them. It puts me on alert. So I requested the audit report which it was claimed showed everything to be “present and correct”; it was due to have been submitted to my office at that point anyway. I also asked for the latest safety inspection report along with the associated brake test for the unit and trailer. The letter requesting that was sent on 29 October 2024. Mr Board responded just over a week later with documents relating to inspections and tests on 5 November 2024 along with the same for 28 December 2023. He also supplied the audit report.

The audit report showed slipped inspection frequencies with the seven-week period on the licence slipping to eight. The report suggests that a new vehicle was put in to service ahead of a first-use inspection. Third party trailers are used but the maintenance arrangements for them are described as “unsatisfactory” and there was no maintenance contract for them. There was no evidence of any brake performance testing at all for unit or trailer. There were some defects reported by the driver but no evidence of remedial action. Driver reportable defects were present on 40% of PMIs with no corresponding driver defect report. The PMI dated 15 September 2024 which should have been included in the operator’s response to the letter of 29 October had no brake performance test and the tyre age had not been checked. There were no PMIs for trailers. There appeared to be issues with manual entries of other work, the working time infringement rate was 10.21% and drivers hours 12.3%. No action had been taken in relation to repeat offences. There were two unaccounted episodes of driving without a card. In relation to the undertaking for quarterly compliance reviews involving operator, transport manager and Logico, the report noted “Meetings were conducted with the previous transport manager, but Keith was not always in attendance”. I concluded that I did not share Mr Board’s view that the report showed everything to be “present and correct”.

Due to the apparent breach of undertaking, the seemingly poor compliance systems and the lack of professional competence, I called the operator and Thomas Keal to public inquiry. An application to add John Lyons as transport manager was made on 26 November 2024. Despite no TM1 form having been lodged, I granted a period of grace until the hearing date and indicated that the application would be considered at the same time.

THE PUBLIC INQUIRY

Thomas Keal attended unrepresented. I was satisfied that Mr Board was aware of the hearing, the documentation having been sent by recorded delivery and email and nothing having bounced-back. I note that Mr Board has subsequently accessed the licence record on 10 January 2025, presumably to check the hearing’s outcome. Having satisfied myself as to good service of the call-up, I proceed to make a decision. Mr Keal had submitted compliance documents in relation to another licence of which he is transport manager. Nothing was received from Messrs Board and Lyons.

Proceedings were recorded and a transcript can be made available. In writing this decision, I have both referred to my written note and listened to the recording.

Mr Keal told me that it had become very difficult to make contact with Mr Board as he was out of the country for three weeks at a time and was not very cooperative. The position with his other operator was entirely different and she was now looking at moving away from scrap metal and in to containers. There was an intention to grow his role in that business. I reviewed compliance documents for that business and saw nothing of significant concern.

The relationship with Mr Board had started well with support from Logico. Mr Keal would try to call him several times a week. All of a sudden, things started to change. Mr Board had bought a new truck and Mr Keal had found out through seeing it on Facebook; he had no knowledge of the purchase in advance. Logico had advised Mr Keal to leave. It was all a battle. Mr Board had declined to have roller brake testing. Mr Keal had genuinely thought he could make a difference and hadn’t wanted to give up which is why he had stayed so long.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Keith Board

In my decision last year, I said “Mr Board entirely failed to comply with the tribunal directions”. That sentence is equally true this year. It is clear that Mr Board has no respect for the regulatory regime in which he seeks to operate.

From the Logico report, I find that the undertaking for periodic compliance reviews has been breached due to the lack of Mr Board’s attendance. Section 26(1)(f) is made out.

The Logico report identifies a lack of compliance systems. Many of the issues relate to driver issues such as the high working time and hours infringements and the failure to report defects. There do not appear to have been any safety inspection reports available for trailers. The standard undertakings in relation to compliance with drivers hours and maintenance have been breached. As a result, Section 26(1)(f) is further made out.

The application to add John Lyons as transport manager appears not to be pursued and I consider it withdrawn. Mr Lyons was not called in relation to his good repute and I make no finding either way. He is free to apply again elsewhere but his history is likely to mean a call to a hearing.

There is no transport manager. The period of grace has expired. Section 27(1) is made out in relation to professional competence.

No finances have been provided. Section 27(1) is made out in relation to financial standing.

Mr Board has entirely breached the trust I put in him last year when I allowed his licence to continue. He has not cooperated with my office. I find that he deliberately supplied a PMI and roller brake test that post-dated my request because he knew full well that the previous inspections were incomplete due to a lack of any brake performance testing. He allowed the lack of brake performance testing to persist for a year despite, I find, advice to remedy it from his transport manager and transport consultant. His failure to attend his compliance reviews speaks to the contempt in which he holds the concept of compliance. I absolutely cannot trust him to be compliant in the future. The failings are so serious despite the extensive support that had been put in place that this is an operation that must be brought to an end for the benefit of other road users. I find that Keith Broad has lost his good repute and Section 27(1) is further made out in that respect.

This is the second public inquiry in 13 months at which Mr Board has failed to engage in the process, having previously failed to cooperate with DVSA. Disqualification is not automatic but neither does it need any additional feature. In this case, I find that a period of time outside the industry is necessary for Mr Board to reconsider the contempt he clearly holds for the regulatory regime. I find that this is a serious case and I adopt the starting point in the Senior Traffic Commissioner’s Statutory Guidance.

I find no cause to question Mr Keal’s good repute and I understand why he did not give up sooner. My advice to him, and to every transport manager, is, when faced with a lack of cooperation from an operator, to leave sooner and to declare the reason for leaving on the notification to my office. The transport manager qualification is hard to gain but very easy to lose.

DECISIONS

Keith Board has lost his good repute and is without professional competence and financial standing. The licence is revoked pursuant to Section 27(1).

Keith Board is disqualified from applying for or holding an operator’s licence in Great Britain until 22 January 2030.

The good repute of Thomas Keal is unblemished.

Kevin Rooney

Traffic Commissioner

22 January 2025