Hi there everyone hoping to get a bit of a heads up from someone who’s potentially had a similar situation. I’ve recently finished my 6months ban due too totting up t99. I’ve finished my ban in 2nd of April. recently got a letter from DVLA saying that my application is with Traffic commission awaiting decision. It’s been 4 weeks of me trying to contact them to find out what’s happening to potentially getting date for the hearing but no luck so sitting and waiting now. However my original reason for the post is to find out how likely are they to give me a further ban ? Or even a potential of not giving me my entitlement back? And before anyone says nothing yes I know I screwed up by collecting too many points in the first place but the 6 months was a good valuable lesson of taking things in to appreciation and made me realise the importance of my license. all my offences ware in a car last one being on a phone 1minute and 38 seconds is all it took to lose it all. I never argued and accepted consequences as I was in the wrong. Anyways I’ve heard people with worse incidents just getting off with a warning but also other being punished further. What are my chances are of the traffic commissioner getting down on me hard ? I’ve got a letter from my ex employer that have put a good word in for me, as they always said they found me to be one of their favourite drivers and never had any complaints with me. Even when DVSA have pulled me in twice found no issues with my taco or my truck I took great pride in what I did and I guess moral of the story is. even once your card is out of the truck we must stay and maintain a professional standard of driving.
No one can say what the TC will do, so I’d ignore any “advice” you get.
You might want to have a gander at this document, which gives you an idea of the parameters the TC will be using to come to their decision
Which Traffic Area Office is dealing with this?
Thank you for the document that’s actually been a good read, finally found a section where hopefully gives a good example of my case of 6 months disqualification for totting up. Page 49 case example 8. Might still be called up for a hearing so they can talk to me which I don’t mind, even if it means longer time of waiting for the unknown. But really appreciate your reply, been quite informative and good to know. Also I’m supposed to be with Easter traffic area from the last email that I’ve had reply from.
because im a sad git i tend to enjoy these sort of links however in case study 8 the guy has three lots of points for speeding and one cu80 which seems to be use of a mobile phone while driving. the attitude of the tc seems to be dont worry about the speeding but you complete blank for using the phone
That’s a fair point I’ve noticed they don’t punish people for speeding or seem to care as much.my 3 speeding convictions have all been 36 in a 30 again. No excuse but I don’t see that as me being a maniac when I have fellow drivers with much more severe cases. Example a friend of mine also a driver was doing 93 in a 70 whiles already on 12 points but he didn’t get banned, just got a hefty fine and 15points which made no sense to me. But again I was the idiot on the phone no matter if it was a short phone call I did my time just hoping they won’t decide for a further ban on my entitlement.
I’m guessing this other driver, wasn’t an HGV driver, if he was just a Cat B (car and van) driver, the rules are not as strict, the TC does not act against basic entitlements, just vocational entitlements.
Not sure if it makes a difference but it’s a good 5 years ago when I just started driving HGV. we both worked for the same employer. And yes he was a HGV driver as well. he was shocked when I received my ban considering his driving record. but I never argued it just dealt with the consequences and moved on. He told me when he went to see TC they went down on him quite hard and gave him a warning if he gets a speeding ticket before all his points come off he would be seeing a 12 month ban.
it seams to me that if they have to deal with all military cases at one office to ensure fairness and consistency it must be that it all depends on who you get. I assume the case studies in the link given are fictional but it does suggest a leeway of interpretation and opinion
Hoping that they give accurate guidance to how they look at things. So this way I’m just hoping a visit to TC, Get a big telling off and that will be the end of things. Definitely not going to be lucky enough with a warning letter from them only, I know I’m not that lucky. it’s now been 7 months and I just want to be back to doing what I loved.
Why are you mentioning military cases? I didn’t see any previous mention.
All courts (and I’m classifying TCs domains in the same vein as a proper “court”) have a degree of variance. Generally they aim to be “hard but fair”, and most of the TC’s cases I hear about seem to bear that out.
For Driver Conduct Hearings it will also depend on whether the driver has professional representation (solicitor) or is being represented by another industry-related professional (their TM) or is simply representing their self (generally not recommended)
i was commenting that if that is the case then it is clear that there is leeway between the different tc’s
Armed Services Personnel
110. Regulation 81 of the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 sets out that service personnel who are holders of a vocational driver licence fall under the jurisdiction of the South Eastern and Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner. This ensures a consistency of approach and provides a single point of contact for the military and the traffic commissioner.
If this is the case because someone “got away” with x doesn’t mean that someone else will either with the same tc or a different one.
Just a quick question is the TC hearing just as serious as a court hearing ? As your saying representing yourself would not be a great idea ? I thought it would require finding representation for very saver cases. As I know TC have you in for hearing if you get certain fines and stuff ?
Well spotted, I hadn’t noticed that previously. South-east TC is Sarah Bell, who is I believe, the sister of the infamous Beverly Bell, so expect the emphasis to be more on “hard” than “fair” 
Serious? If you consider having your entitlement returned to be a serious issue, then yes.
TCs don’t give fines or points, they do suspend entitlements or refuse to return them or impose other conditions
Is that the one where the lady speeds and the idiot following her makes inane comments about how he has been banned but she drives like that…
One would hope if the police caught her they would deal with it appropriately but as far as i know she doesn’t/didn’t have a hgv entitlement and should therefore be only held to the standards of a car license and any requirements of her job
I suspect you’re referring to the video in the link below, there’s just a backing track, no commentary by the following driver (at least not in the parts I’ve watched). The operator in question ended up regretting his actions… Definitely not the world’s smartest YouTuber
It has been suggested that her eventual stepping down from being the Senior TC may have been related to her poor-quality driving (40mph in a 30mph zone, FFS…), but that is hard to confirm as TCs are on fixed-term contracts and require periodic re-appointment to their role by the DfT
thats the one id forgotten it was “subtitles/captions” rather than commentary. The link doesnt work for me so cant see what the judge said but going by the headline it seems he agreed with me as far as the o-license holder goes.
It just stinks of sour grapes to me.
thats for the police to deal with and im sure they would of rather than paying a pi to follow her around
A judge has quashed an appeal against the decision that saw Philip Higgs banned from holding a PSV O-licence, after he hired a private investigator to film former senior traffic commissioner (TC) Beverley Bell (pictured) committing alleged motoring offences.
Judge Leveson said that Higgs had created an “intimidatory atmosphere” for those working in transport regulation and had made a “direct attack” on the adjudicating process by posting the video.
Higgs, director at Blackpool bus operator Catch 22 Bus, was banned from holding an O-licence for a year by deputy TC John Baker following a public inquiry (PI) in November 2016.
The firm also lost its O-licence, but the effect of this was delayed until the appeal concluded.
Baker found that Higgs had lost his repute as his behaviour “drew into question” the likelihood of complying with operating requirements.
Higgs and the operator appealed against the decision to the Upper Tribunal, which earlier this month found that it was reasonable for Baker to take the video into account when determining whether Higgs was fit to run commercial vehicles. It will lose its PSV licence on 18 February.
During the PI last year, Higgs told the deputy TC that he felt it was right to expose someone who was ignoring the rules of the road. However, Baker said he had a range of “acceptable options” open to him if he suspected any wrongdoing on Bell’s behalf.
In his appeal against the decision, Higgs’ lawyer told the judge that he had cooperated with the police investigation and had refrained from posting a second video at their request.
The lawyer said it was important to note that there had been no intention to influence the senior TC’s decision by posting the video as she had previously recused herself from dealing with Higgs’ case, and that the matters considered at a PI must always relate to the operation of a transport business.
He said the video had little relevance to the operation of a licence.
He also argued it was wrong of the deputy TC to not give more weight to the positive factors of the case, including a clear intention to comply with the regulatory regime and the provision of a good bus service.
The Secretary of State for transport, also represented at the appeal hearing, argued that it was clear from legislation that conduct considered at a PI need not be directly connected with road transport.
The judge said: “There can be no rational argument that the conduct was not connected to the regulatory regime and the operation of the licence.
“It was directed at the senior TC because of her official position and function. In our view the sanctions imposed by the commissioner were the very least that could reasonably be imposed in the circumstances of this case.”
i have spent hours reading through articles and forums to gather information. your links have been helpful ive analysed to a point im remembering it all word by word 
but it also seem to have given false hope in regards that it might be alright but then again i know I’m not that lucky. all cases with my similar situation seem to end positive. however going back to your first reply every case and situation will always have a different outcome for different people. i will have to bite the bullet and will seek legal advice even if the funds are not there. but all this research and stressing over this has kind of made me think is it even worth it ? after my ban i got employed by a place near me. and in the last 7 months moved up in positions and now have been offered a position that matches my old employers wage, with potential of gaining management position. so again do i just stop stressing and forget about my HGV when in a year or two ill be on better wage then driving a HGV. or do i go back to what i loved doing for the last 5 years all i know is I’ve learnt more about rules and regulations in the last two weeks of research for answers then driving in the last 5 
Forget the HGV job. Don’t jump through hoops for anyone. Take the other job and push any regrets from your mind. In twenty years you’ll thank me for this.
I spent twenty years dreaming of sleeping with Claudia Schiffer and all I got to show for it was a restraining order! Pick your battles, and learn to accept with good grace that some things are not meant to be.