Specialist transport solicitor Weightmans has been staging mock public inquiries (PIs) for several years, designed to give clients a flavour of what goes on and how to behave if you find yourself called up to one – and how to avoid being called up to one in the first place.
Weightmans likes to make the process as realistic as possible. “The way to do it is to actually put a real company director in the director’s seat, a real transport manager in the transport manager’s seat, and a real driver trainer in the driver’s seat”, says Chris Powell, partner and transport regulatory solicitor at Weightmans.
Late last year, Weightmans was discussing the difficulties of compliance with TfL’s Direct Vision Standard (DVS) with Brigade Electronics’ UK marketing manager Emily Hardy and head of UK connected services James Ashford.
In October, the latest phase of DVS comes into force, when the minimum star rating requirement will be raised from one to three. Vehicles over 12 tonnes GVW with less than three stars will need to be fitted with a Progressive Safe System (PSS) to gain entry to Greater London.
In June this year, Weightmans and Brigade organised a mock PI. Assisting at the event were specialist transport lawyers Elliott Kenton and Sarah Jennings from Weightmans, supporting Chris Powell. Kenton took the part of the traffic commissioner (TC), with Powell acting as the solicitor supporting the fictitious haulier called to the PI, Headache Logistics, and Jennings supporting the fictitious former driver.
Food producer Samworth Brothers, which operates over 130 vehicles nationwide, with some 300 drivers operating from four sites in the UK, kindly lent two of its team to take part in the event – Richard Hutchinson and Alistair Leckie. Hutchinson took the part of transport manager (TM) Jamie Grayson, while Leckie took the part of Headache Logistics director Robin Stark. Ashford played driver Charlie Dent. Alex Burlison of the Metropolitan Police CV Unit completed the cast, taking the part of Sergeant Steve Fisher of the Metropolitan Police CV Unit. Burlison has extensive experience in policing commercial vehicles in the London area.
The story is set in July 2025, when the DVS PSS requirements have come into force Headache Logistics operates a total of 400 vehicles and trailers from four sites. The case involves the company’s 80-vehicle operating centre in Gotham. Transport manager Grayson has worked there for four months, with long-standing transport manager Alex Kyle (she has been off sick for extended periods).
A few months before, a Headache Logistics truck driven by Dent was subject to a routine roadside check attended by the police and DVLA, inside the DVS zone. They were looking for compliance with the new TfL DVS regulations.
Fisher had stopped the vehicle and spotted a large crack in the nearside door mirror and a bald tyre. The vehicle was issued with an immediate prohibition notice, although this was withdrawn when Fisher directed Dent to return the vehicle to his depot for rectification. Although the vehicle had been issued with a DVS permit, the alarm appeared to have a fault and had been switched off, meaning that the driver was not alerted to vulnerable road users’ presence around the vehicle. Dent returned the vehicle as directed and resigned from his job, believing that he would be sacked anyway.
The PSS had been bought cheaply online and fitted by Headache’s in-house fitter. It had not been checked since installation. The vehicle had a one-star DVS rating, but the blind spot detection system audible alarm had been fitted with a cut-off switch because it proved to be far too sensitive, and when switched on, was not working properly.
Two days after the routine check, Fisher wrote to Headache Logistics, initiating a desk-based assessment. He requested information about preventative maintenance inspections (PMIs), tachographs, and analysis and licence checks from the past 12 months. Headache Logistics did not respond because Kyle was absent from work and did not supply a forwarding email address. Sergeant Fisher then wrote again to the company,and this time Grayson responded. He had not found all the records requested.
There was no evidence of load security policies or tachograph records policy. Tachograph analysis showed incidences of speeding and drivers’ hours offences.
Not surprisingly, Fisher referred the matter to the TC, who wrote to Headache Logistics some five weeks later, summoning the company to appear at a PI. The TC asked for records covering the past 12 months. His concerns included the apparently defective DVS PSS equipment, the apparent lack of a maintenance regime and preventative maintenance record and driver defect reports, and a missing mileage report involving a 40km claim for maintenance mileage. Even though Dent had left the company, he was also asked to attend, where he would be subject to separate but related enquiries.
At the PI, the clerk clearly laid out who was hearing the case, what it was, and who had been called. Details of the driver hearing were also presented. Although summoned to appear, Alex Kyle was not present.
The TC said that it was unsatisfactory that Kyle had not attended and that her reputation was at risk. A 12-month document bundle had been presented, and although there were some improvements, there were still some pertinent issues. The TC described the TM arrangements as shocking, with Grayson left to his own devices while out of his depth and inexperienced. Kyle’s departure should have been notified to the TC.
Sergeant Fisher gave evidence that the tyre should have been picked up in an adequate daily walk-around check. He would not have expected to see a vehicle in this condition on the road. Headache Logistics had provided a handwritten daily check report with all boxes ticked. Most previous reports had ticks or had been left blank and signed.
Fisher considered that road safety was compromised and that the driver should not be able to disable the DVS PSS system. Dent had not been given training on the system or relevant policies.
The TC asked for two undertakings from Stark: to appoint a second TM within eight weeks; and to undertake an O-licence awareness training (OLAT) course. He was also reminded about the collective responsibility among directors. The TC found his answers on dealing with the desk-based assessment unsatisfactory, while Stark was aware that maintenance needed to be handled better.
Counsel asked that since this was the first PI or regulatory action that the company had faced, weight should be placed on that. No challenge to the police or DVSA was presented and shortcomings were due to systems failure when Kyle was off sick, leaving an inexperienced deputy.
In his summing up, the TC commented that: “A system that does not work is no system at all. There is no justification for these matters. Drivers cannot avoid their personal responsibilities.”
He noted that the company had used ineffective transport management and that the TM was not exercising her role, while Grayson was not exercising responsibility. The driver switching off the DVS PSS was a deliberate act and the company put profit before safety. 
The TC imposed a time-limited curtailment, reducing the 80-vehicle licence at Gotham to 40 for two months. He instructed the company to make urgent contingency arrangements. He emphasised the OLAT course for Stark and warned him over the company failures.
Regarding Kyle, he deemed that her good repute was lost. She was disqualified from being a TM for 12 months.
Dent’s HGV licence was revoked and he was disqualified from driving for three months. Aggravating circumstances were his abusive conduct during the roadside check, but in mitigation, the TC recognised that he was under pressure from his employer, had difficult personal circumstances, and had an otherwise good record.
- This article was previoulsy published in Commercial Motor, to subscribe see the latest Commercial Motor subscription offer
