Construction News

Sun June 13 2021

Related Information

Disrespectful scaffolder forbidden from running HGVs

5 May 16 A Betchworth scaffolder who had ‘insufficient respect’ for the law on the operation of vehicles has been refused permission to run HGVs.

London and southeast traffic commissioner Nick Denton said that Daniel Lippett could not be trusted to run a compliant operation.

The regulator’s decision to refuse Mr Lippett’s two vehicle application follows a public inquiry on 23rd March 2016.

During the hearing, the traffic commissioner was told that Mr Lippett had previously served as a director of M&L Elite Scaffolding Services Ltd, which held a valid operator’s licence.

As part of his new application, Mr Lippett had indicated the limited company licence would be surrendered. However, Companies House records revealed that he had resigned from the company seven days before the application form had been completed. He therefore had no authority to surrender the existing licence.

Among the concerns that Mr Denton had about Daniel Lippett’s application was evidence from the Driver & Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA ) showing an adverse compliance record, including:

Related Information
  • the use of a vehicle without a valid MOT
  • a vehicle displaying a licence disc associated with a different vehicle registration mark
  • the use of an unauthorised operating centre.

In his application for a licence in his name, Mr Lippett declared that he was already operating under the authority of the existing licence held by M&L Elite Scaffolding Services Ltd, even though he had left that company.

In evidence to the traffic commissioner, Mr Lippett said at the time of the DVSA stop in October 2015, he thought the vehicle had an MOT certificate. On purchasing the vehicle in February 2015, he was assured that it had 12 months MOT.

Mr Lippett subsequently accepted that he had not checked this or seen the certificate confirming the MOT. The traffic commissioner asked Mr Lippett why he had continued to operate the vehicle after the stop for a further month, knowing it did not have an MOT. Mr Lippett said that, having booked a test, he thought it was legal to continue operating.

In a written decision, Mr Denton said: “I find that Mr Lippett has insufficient respect for the law on the operation of vehicles, as instanced also by his continuing to use a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition for a further month after the DVSA stop had told him beyond all doubt that the vehicle had no MOT.”

He concluded: “ have asked myself if, in the light of the above events, I can trust Mr Lippett to run a compliant operation and have concluded that I cannot. I gave Mr Lippett every chance after the public inquiry to make some amends and at least be compliant for the short period before the date on which I took a final decision on his application. He did not succeed even in doing that. I conclude that he is not a fit person to hold a licence.”

Got a story? Email


Click here to view more construction news »