When worlds collide you tend to get fireworks…
Pretty much the same at a company I worked for.
A driver told the boss exactly where to stick his job. Several months later he called up to ask to speak to the boss.
In the open office boss said “I bet I know what he wants” and picked up the line.
“Hi…Oh yeah…Oh, hang on…”
“Nope. I’ve stuck my hand up my arse and can’t find your old job anywhere”
I wasn`t in the office but several people were, so in my book…yeah it happened.
ok i might be not getting this but what does it matter if a vehicle failed an mot provided that it is repaired properly before it goes back on the road. I realise that vehicles were serviced every 6 weeks or at least a check over of basic components. I don’t see what that has to do with his standing at running a company
Quite rightly it affects the OCRS.
sorry that one made me spit my tea across the room ill have to remember that one
A car MOT can be used as a fault finder.
DVSA expect an HGV to be presented for MOT in a roadworthy condition which will pass an MOT at the first attempt.
A very dim view is taken of presenting a truck or trailer for test with something as obvious as a bald tyre or lights off.
The thinking is that if the maintenance regime is effective, a vehicle or trailer should be able to pass an MOT at any point in its service.
To be fair, in a properly run organisation, that is near enough the case.
A 67% MOT failure rate, as in that article, is pretty much cast iron evidence that his vehicles were not being properly maintained at any point in the year.
Not to mention the inability to produce Periodic Maintenance Inspection sheets showing any faults found.
You only tend to see them like that if they are quickly filled in for months in arrears because you know that a fleet inspection is coming.
You don’t get summoned to a public enquiry if your operation looks anything like you are making an effort to do things properly.
Oh it matters all right! It’s points against the O-licence via the OCRS score, what you may know colloquially as the “Traffic Light Scheme”
Here’s a very brief overview
And the “standing” under discussion is Financial Standing - an Operator MUST have money available for the number of vehicles on their O-licence, in this example there were four vehicle, so the operator needs permanent access to £21,500 (first vehicle £8000, £4500 for each subsequent vehicle)
Here’s the link to the full Written Decision, for people in my position these publications are light entertainment, and this one is the equivalent of a Saturday night pizza with my favourite movie and a nice bottle of wine - A truly epic fail of the highest order 
quite interesting reading. I went back to the 5 on the previous page and read them as well. Good to see the tc’s seem to have their brains switched on and don’t allow them to surrender the licenses to avoid punishment.
However even though im sure this has been thought of. what stops me hiring a company or an individual to hold the operating license for me. or even changing my name?
Oh yeah, you can believe the OTC has its head screwed on properly and there are a range of safeguards in place.
Segment 10.1 of the Written Decision: the licence has been revoked, it no longer exists so cannot be held by anyone. If anyone tried to obtain a new O-licence on these premises for these vehicles, they would subject to the most intense scrutiny imaginable, the TC would look for any links between that individual and the previous company, and would at a Preliminary Hearing or even a Public Inquiry question them face-to-face as to why they are applying for the licence.
I once went on the O-licence of a company who had narrowly escaped having their licence revoked. Before my position was approved I was subjected to what I can only describe as a “thorough grilling one step below waterboarding” as to why I was prepared to do it and how I planned to manage the transport operations of a company who had, in the previous nine months, been behaving like utter cowboys in bandit country. It was like being in court as “the accused” but without a Barrister to stick up for you.
Changing his name wouldn’t help, a TM needs to be able to physically provide upon request their qualification certificate, this shows their name, date of birth, town of birth, and issue date of the certificate. Trying to get a respectable exam awarding body to issue you a replacement certificate in a different name would be “challenging” to say the least.
An O-licence application requires a nominated TM who must complete a form (TM1) which has a section asking if you have been convicted of a “relevant offence” and if you have in the past been associated with a company where a licence was curtailed or revoked, and it is implicit that signing a false declaration can render you liable to prosecution in the criminal courts.
sorry i guess i have misunderstood the system.
I thought if i wanted to be an owner driver i could go and buy myself a unit and then employ someone remotely to be the o license holder and tm
Not remotely, the TM has to visit the Operator (you) and the vehicle (spot checks of vehicle condition), they have to commit in writing to the amount of hours per week they will visit, and have some means of documenting the visits, they need to analyse driver card and VU downloads (remote downloads of these is a practical option if hardware is fitted).
The O-licence holder has to be the Operator, but they can employ someone else as their TM. However the financial aspects of this makes it highly desirable that the Operator should get themself qualified to be their own TM.