O licence application refused for suspected “fronting”


O licence application refused for suspected “fronting”

Coach company applied for licence as a cover up after revocation

Nick Denton

Traffic commissioners have a really important role in keeping fair and open competition throughout the industry.

When someone acts as a front for another business, the regulators don’t know who they’re licensing. 

That’s why regulatory action at public inquiry is an integral part of stamping fronting out.

A coach company from Wolverhampton received this message the hard way when the West Midlands Traffic Commissioner, Nick Denton, refused its licence application.

The firm had obvious connections to a revoked licence with a history of non-compliance and Mr Denton wasn’t prepared to let them carry passengers and run vehicles.

For a start, the application was made just days after the revocation of another PSV licence. This raised concerns with licensing staff in Leeds. Discrepancies were also uncovered between the information on the application form and Companies House records.

Mr Denton said that, on the balance of probability, the application “started out as a front, to allow continued operations” for the revoked operator.

Using the licence of a different entity to conceal the fact that you’re the actual operator is fronting. And it’s even more serious if the entity hiding behind the front is already banned or has had action taken against it.

Fronting goes entirely against road safety and fair competition, the core principles of operator licensing.