Call us for free on 0800 1777 522
Info Articles

NA Legal

Solicitors for small & medium business.

Guide to Public Inquiries

Think for a moment what your operators licence is worth. The ultimate value will depend on how big your business is and how much it depends on its operators licence.

An operators licence for even a modest sized business is likely to be worth tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds to the owner. Perhaps millions to a larger transport operator. Being called to a public inquiry means that the continuation of your operators licence, and even your whole business, is uncertain.

This guide aims to answer some of the basic questions you might have on public inquiries to enable you to better understand the process. Anyone called to public inquiry should take specialist legal advice without delay.

What is a Public Inquiry?

Traffic Commissioners decide who is granted an operators licence and also decides when a licence should be taken away or subject to other sanctions. Traffic Commissioners are the regulators of the goods and passenger road transport industry.

A public inquiry is a formal legal hearing where Traffic Commissioners hear evidence in a court room setting, listen to a case and then make decisions on how their powers should be used in any given case.

There are two main types of public inquiries. There are public inquiries for regulatory reasons. These are to consider taking disciplinary action against operators who are accused of breaking the rules. The other type is where the Traffic Commissioner decides on applications. These could be applications for new operator licences or where an existing licence holder wants to make changes to their licence.

 

What are the Traffic Commissioners’ Powers ?

In disciplinary cases, the Traffic Commissioner can decide to terminate the licence, suspend it or reduce the number of vehicles authorised.

Conditions can also be placed on your operators licence which can restrict the way you want to do business.

The Traffic Commissioner can also disqualify operators, transport managers and company directors for either a fixed period of time or indefinitely.

Where a new licence is being considered, the Traffic Commissioner decides whether to grant or refuse the application and whether conditions should be attached.

 

How do they use these powers ?

When exercising their powers, Traffic Commissioners have to follow the law and act in the public interest. During the public inquiry hearing, the Traffic Commissioner has to follow a fair procedure and follow natural justice.

The guiding principles for decision making in most cases are road safety, fair competition within the transport industry and compliance with the law.

Interpreting these guiding principles gives the Traffic Commissioner significant discretion though in some circumstances decisions are mandatory. The Senior Traffic Commissioner produces guidelines in an effort to standardise decisions. The guidance is published as a number of statutory documents that can be found on the internet.

 

How do I know about a Public Inquiry ?

About a month before the public inquiry you will be sent a detailed letter called a call up letter. This sets out the date and time of the public inquiry and also details of the law, evidence and issues that will be considered.

Sometimes you will receive other papers with the call up letter or sometimes these will follow a short time later. Upon receiving the call up letter you should decide whether to take legal advice.

If you are not available on the date set for the public inquiry then you have the right to request an adjournment. However, it is only in exceptional circumstances than an adjournment will be allowed, such as if you have medical reasons for not being able to attend or if you are out of the country at the time. You would need to send the Traffic Commissioner firm evidence and any request must be made as early as possible.

 

What is the likely outcome ?

The outcome very much depends on the facts of each case. All you can do is address the specific issues in your case.

The potential outcomes are very serious. In a regulatory / disciplinary hearing, this could potentially be revocation of your operators licence and a disqualification order preventing you from applying for or holding a licence in future. Even lesser outcomes such as conditions or reducing your vehicle fleet can have significant long-lasting consequences.

The annual statistics published for the outcome of cases in 2013 shows :

 

Can I appeal the decision?

Traffic Commissioner decisions are very hard to appeal. This is because they will only be set aside on narrow grounds. You would need to persuade an appeal court that the Traffic Commissioner had made an error on the law, had acted unfairly or was so plainly wrong that the decision cannot be justified.

Because decisions are so hard to overturn, you should see the public inquiry as your one and only chance to put your case.

If your public inquiry does not turn out well, you should get advice quickly.

 

What is the procedure at Public Inquiry?

After you arrive at the venue on the day of the public inquiry the Traffic Commissioner’s clerk will come and speak to you and take your details.

In the court room, when the hearing starts the Traffic Commissioner will introduce the hearing and make any preliminary remarks.

Your solicitor will have the opportunity to address the Traffic Commissioner. After that DVSA (formerly called VOSA) will present their evidence if they are involved in your case. Your solicitor will cross examine DVSA and probe their evidence, this is often a very crucial part of the case. The Traffic Commissioner will then ask questions of DVSA.

In certain cases there may be other witnesses giving evidence against you. These could be police officers, staff from other government agencies and sometimes other operators, drivers or transport managers. In cases involving environmental issues, members of the public may be involved.

Once the evidence against you has been heard, it is then your opportunity as the operator (or applicant if a new application is involved) to present your case.

Once all the evidence has been presented to the Traffic Commissioner, your solicitor (or you if you are not represented) will make a closing statement. This will normally involve a summary of the evidence that has been heard, legal argument and an explanation of your case. This is the moment to persuade the Traffic Commissioner, the closing submission is very important.

 

What kind of evidence is involved ?

The most obvious type of evidence is oral testimony from witnesses. You don’t usually take an oath at a public inquiry but everyone is under a duty to tell the truth and failing to do so is a criminal offence. Every public inquiry is tape recorded.

As well as witness evidence, there is likely to be a lot of evidence in written form. A few weeks before your public inquiry the Traffic Commissioner’s office will forward you a set of papers called the Traffic Commissioner’s brief. The brief is effectively a copy of the file that the Traffic Commissioner has on your case. Briefs can sometimes be large, sometimes running to several hundred pages.

The Traffic Commissioner’s brief will include items such as DVSA / VOSA reports, records on you and copies of evidence collected during the course of an investigation.

 

What evidence should I put forward?

This is where you need to plan carefully and get good advice.

There are many examples of the type of evidence that could be relevant to your case. Whether evidence is relevant is one thing, what evidence will help you succeed in your case is a separate question and one where specialist advice is necessary.

Pieces of evidence are only the basic building blocks of your case. Whether and how evidence is put is a matter to approach very carefully. Sometimes there are reasons for not putting forward evidence that appears helpful to you and sometimes, conversely, there are good reasons to put forward evidence that on the face of it doesn’t look helpful to your case. There are sometimes strategic considerations.

Some of the different types of evidence that could be included in your case are:

Witnesses in person

Witness statements

Vehicle records and certificates

Maintenance records

Tachographs and driver records

Hand books

Written instructions to drivers

Websites

Computer records

CVs

Training certificates

Photographs

Business plan

Expert reports

Membership certificates

Letters and references

Computer records

Bank statements

Employment records

Financial records / tax returns

Planning permission

Government guidelines

... and many much more.

Do I need a solicitor ?

The letter calling you to the public inquiry stronlgy recommends that you take legal advice and consider representation.

The simple fact is that a public inquiry is a very serious legal hearing. The effect of decisions made at a public inquiry are potentially far more serious than rulings of other courts and tribunals and could see you being put out of business.

The cost of getting good representation at a public inquiry will represent only a small fraction of your turnover and the downside of getting this wrong is potentially devastating.

 

A Few Words About Our Service

My firm specialised in transport law and I deal with a large number of public inquiries each year in all parts of the UK.

I have been involved in transport law since the late 1990s and it is what I specialise in. Directly dealing with public inquiries is about 80% of my work and I regularly appear at public inquiries in all parts of England, Wales and Scotland. I therefore have a significant breadth of experience and expertise to help with your public inquiry. My clients enjoy a high level of success.

Whoever represents you at your public inquiry, you must be confident that you can work with them and that they understand fully how to run your case successfully.

 

If you’re facing a public inquiry and don’t know what to do, please call us now for a free, no obligation telephone discussion and let us explain how we can help you.  You can call us on 0800 1777 522, contact us by email or use our free enquiry form.  

Notifying the Traffic Commissioner
Transport Working Time Regulations

Call us for free on 0800 1777 522


Get In Touch Call or fill out the form below

Please let us know your name.
Please let us know your email address.
Please write a subject for your message.
Please let us know your message.
Invalid Input

 


We advise and represent transport businesses throughout the whole of the UK in all parts of England, Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland

Uk





Latest Blogs

Applying for an Operator’s Licence (O Licence) is more than just completing a form—it's a demonstration of trustworthiness. The Traffic Commissioner (TC) will only grant a licence if satisfied that th...
Being called to a Public Inquiry is a serious matter for any operator. But facing two inquiries within a year can put an operator’s very survival at risk. In this case, our client—a licensed operator—...
Recently, we were instructed well in advance—approximately five weeks before the hearing—to represent a client facing serious regulatory challenges. This lead time was crucial, allowing us to prepare ...

IF YOU NEED HELP OR ADVICE

Call us today for free on 0800 1777 522
Send us an enquiry online via our contact form HERE
Email us on contact@nalegal.co.uk

Latest Transport Law

Transport Law
Applying for an Operator’s Licence (O Licence) is more than just completing a form—it's a demonstration of trustworthiness. The Traffic Commissioner (TC) will only grant a licence if satisfied that the applicant can be relied upon to comply with the responsibilities that come with it. That trust starts with the application.

The Application Form – A Critical First Impression

For new applicants, the first and most important step is completing the application form correctly. Done properly, a licence can often be granted within the target timeframe of six weeks or less. Done incorrectly, and the process can stall or even result in a proposed refusal and a call to attend a public inquiry (PI).

One of our clients experienced exactly that.

The Issue: An Honest Mistake with Serious Consequences

Our client had submitted an application which, on its face, appeared to be incomplete. Specifically, it failed to declare a historic association with a previous O Licence application. While the omission was a genuine mistake, it raised a red flag for the TC.

The Office of the Traffic Commissioner (OTC) treated the matter seriously. The failure to declare past associations can suggest negligence—or worse—and it called into question the applicant’s reliability.

Our Approach: Full Disclosure and Positive Evidence

We assisted our client in preparing a comprehensive written submission to the TC's office in advance of the hearing. This included:

  • A clear explanation of how the error occurred.

  • Evidence showing that there was no intent to mislead.

  • Detailed information about the client’s proposed compliance systems.

  • Supporting documentation showing that the error had brought no advantage—only the disadvantage of triggering a PI.

The Outcome: Licence Granted with Conditions

At the public inquiry, the client gave open and honest answers about the error and demonstrated an up-to-date understanding of the maintenance and compliance obligations expected of O Licence holders.

The TC was ultimately satisfied that the application had been made in good faith. The licence was granted, with a condition that the operator complete an independent systems audit within six months and submit the findings to the OTC.

Key Takeaway: Accuracy is Essential

This case serves as a clear reminder of the importance of getting the application right first time. Even minor errors can result in delays, additional scrutiny, and the stress and cost of a public inquiry.

If you're applying for an O Licence, it pays to seek professional guidance from the start. Our team can help you navigate the process, ensure your paperwork is accurate and complete, and give you the best chance of a smooth application.
Transport Law
Being called to a Public Inquiry is a serious matter for any operator. But facing two inquiries within a year can put an operator’s very survival at risk. In this case, our client—a licensed operator—found themselves before the Traffic Commissioner for the second time in under twelve months. The issue? Failure to follow through on a straightforward undertaking given at the first hearing.

The First Public Inquiry

The operator initially faced a Public Inquiry due to several maintenance failings, along with wider compliance concerns. On paper, the case looked serious. However, the company was committed to improvement and had started taking corrective action even before the hearing date was set.

We were instructed in good time and provided detailed advice not just on the maintenance issues raised, but also on other areas of compliance that had not been fully appreciated by the operator. The company took on board our recommendations and made a robust response to the DVSA’s findings. At the inquiry, the Traffic Commissioner acknowledged the positive steps taken, and the outcome was a formal warning—no more.

The Missed Undertaking

One of the undertakings given at the first hearing was for the operator to arrange an independent systems audit within six months. This was a clear and reasonable requirement. Unfortunately, the audit was not carried out within the required timeframe, and no communication was made with the Traffic Commissioner’s office.

When the TC’s office followed up, the operator explained that the failure had been an honest oversight. An audit was booked immediately, but by then it was too late to avoid the consequences. A second Public Inquiry was called—this time with the O Licence at serious risk.

The Second Hearing

We were instructed once again. The operator accepted our further advice and offered several new undertakings to address the situation. As before, the company’s director and transport manager presented well at the hearing.

In our legal submissions, we emphasised that this was a compliant and responsible operator that had learned from past mistakes and was not a threat to road safety or fair competition. We acknowledged the seriousness of the repeat appearance but highlighted the progress made and the company’s genuine efforts to get things right.

The Outcome

Despite being unimpressed by the need for a second hearing, the Traffic Commissioner accepted that the business had taken appropriate action and showed genuine intent to comply. While revocation was considered, the TC decided—just—to stop short of it.

The result was a short, two-week curtailment of vehicle authority. Given the circumstances, this was a remarkable outcome.

Our client recognised how close they had come to losing their licence altogether and expressed their sincere thanks for our guidance and representation throughout both proceedings.
Transport Law

Recently, we were instructed well in advance—approximately five weeks before the hearing—to represent a client facing serious regulatory challenges. This lead time was crucial, allowing us to prepare a comprehensive case and avoid the pitfalls that often accompany last-minute instructions, including potential criticism from the TC for insufficient preparation. 

The Issues Identified

During a PSV checkpoint, several significant compliance issues were uncovered:

  • Driving without the correct entitlement

  • Absence of a valid MOT or having the wrong type of MOT

  • Insufficient daily rest periods for drivers

Following this, the DVSA launched a detailed traffic investigation that revealed serious systems failures within the operator’s management. While the operator was not prosecuted, the Operator Licence was placed under threat, and they were required to submit evidence at the Public Inquiry.

Our Approach

We advised the operator thoroughly on all key issues identified in the TC’s PI Brief, as well as on additional risks not explicitly raised. Our recommendations included targeted training and educational courses specifically designed for PSV operations, emphasizing the importance of compliance and system improvements.

The operator’s cooperation was exemplary. Unlike cases where operators seek to mislead or minimize faults, this operator acknowledged the technical nature of many offences—offences serious in regulatory terms but not necessarily posing a substantial threat to road safety or fair competition.

Preparation and Evidence Submission

Submissions were made well ahead of the hearing—three weeks prior to the DVSA and two weeks prior to the TC’s office. The evidence demonstrated a robust overhaul of operational systems and a fundamental shift in compliance culture. Importantly, DVSA’s subsequent reports acknowledged that the operator was broadly compliant with all relevant regulatory requirements.

The Hearing and Outcome

At the Public Inquiry, both the operator and the transport manager presented clear, confident, and candid evidence. Their preparedness and willingness to accept responsibility helped the Traffic Commissioner in reaching a balanced decision.

The TC acknowledged the operator’s orderly preparation and improvements, resulting in a warning and a short removal of a margin of vehicle authority. This outcome had minimal adverse impact on the business and reflected positively on the operator’s prompt and serious response to legal advice.


Why Early Legal Advice Matters

This case highlights the critical importance of instructing specialist transport law advisers promptly when facing regulatory challenges. Early engagement allows for: 

  • Thorough investigation and preparation

  • Effective response to all issues raised

  • Mitigation of potential penalties through demonstration of proactive compliance

If your PSV or transport business faces compliance issues or a Public Inquiry, contact NA Legal for expert guidance and representation. Our experience can make a decisive difference in securing the best possible outcome.