OLCIS eNews – August 2025

Tuesday 26 August 2025

Welcome to the August edition of Logistics UK’s Operator Licensing Compliance Information Service (OLCIS) enews update. This document is a monthly round-up of transport news items sent out as part of your OLCIS subscription. Its objective is to keep you up to date with news affecting your commercial vehicle operation. To view previous editions and access your other subscription benefits, visit the dedicated OLCIS hub.

We welcome any comments and suggestions for new topics you would like to see included within OLCIS enews, contact Customer Services with any feedback.

Further updates to DVSA’s roadside prohibition notification process

Recently there have been changes to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency’s (DVSA) roadside enforcement to record vehicle encounters.

Since 18 June 2025, prohibition notifications have been emailed to operators if their operator licence has an email address recorded against it. Then on 17 July, DVSA changed the format of the email to include a link to download the prohibition notice.

From 7 August, if the operator licence has an email address recorded, DVSA will send prohibition clearance notices by email instead of post. Operators without an email address recorded will continue receiving prohibition notifications and clearance notices to their business address by post.

Requirements for towing trailers in Great Britain

On 15 July, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) published updated guidance on requirements for towing trailers in GB. The updated INF30 PDF can be viewed here. The updated guidance includes information on the limits when towing with a zero emission vehicle.

Traffic Commissioners: annual report 2024 – 2025 published

On 7 August, the Traffic Commissioners for Great Britain published their annual report for 2024-2025, providing the latest information on major aspect of the Traffic Commissioner’s judicial, regulatory and administrative roles.

The report details the statistics on licensing and regulatory activities, performance against their strategic objectives to 2025, and an evaluation of the current sate of the industry. The report also includes assistance to operators on how to be more compliant, specifically highlighting vehicle maintenance, fair competition and bridge strikes.

A link to the annual report can be found here.

Top questions this month at the Members Advice Centre     

Q: Is it permissible for drivers to leave their digital tachograph cards in the vehicle overnight when they are not taking a daily rest in the cab?

A: Unfortunately, there is no specific guidance on leaving cards in vehicles, however there are numerous references within legislation which define the driver card as being the responsibility of the driver and ensuring that it can only be used by them. Examples of this can be found in EU 165/2014 Article 27, which states ‘The driver card is personal.’ This is then reinforced in EU 165/2014, Article 34 which confirms that ‘Drivers shall adequately protect the record sheets or driver cards, and shall not use dirty or damaged record sheets or driver cards’.

Looking at the digital tachograph rules in DVSA’s guidance on drivers’ hours and tachographs, it confirms the rules for driver cards, stating that ‘Drivers may only be in possession of one driver’s card and must never use anyone else’s card or allow another driver to use their card’.

By leaving the card in the vehicle, it opens the possibility that the card may be used by someone other than the authorised person, even unwittingly. This could be, for instance, moving for loading or unloading or even a vehicle inspection.

Q: We operate a large fleet of vehicles from cars to goods vehicles that come under operator licensing. Our company policy is that driver walk around checks are carried by all drivers of any company vehicles whether they are on operator licence or not. If we stop carrying out walk around checks on all our vehicles and just carry the checks out on operator licence vehicles would this raise any issues?

A: The driver daily walk around check forms part of your maintenance system. They are not as in depth as the planned safety inspections but are put in place to ensure to the best of the driver’s knowledge when he or she takes a vehicle out on the road it is in a safe and roadworthy condition. Any defects found by the driver that would affect the roadworthiness of the vehicle, such as worn tyres, defective lights etc. can be spotted and rectified before the vehicle is used on the public highway.

Driver daily walk around checks are a requirement for vehicles operated under operator licensing, (as a means of ensuring they are in a roadworthy condition) but as you have this in place for all your vehicles this can only be a good thing. A point worth noting is the fact that problems found on non-operator licence vehicles can reflect badly on your operator licence and would attract unwanted attention from DVSA. You have a duty to ensure all your vehicles used on a public highway are in a safe and roadworthy condition, and daily walk around checks are a proven method of helping to comply with this requirement.

Q: Our driver has licence entitlement in both HGV and PSV. However, when they are completing periodic training this is not being cross recognised against both of the categories, why is this?

A: The driver would need to have obtained the initial qualification in both categories for periodic training to be cross recognised. For example, they could have gained full Driver CPC in PSV but the nature of their HGV role (eg military) meant they did not require CPC, so did not take all five modules of the HGV tests. Therefore, for the training to be cross recognised the driver would need to complete the relevant training.

Compliance news: around the courts

Background

The operator holds a restricted goods vehicle operator licence authorising six vehicles and six trailers. The licence was held by a sole director who was also the responsible person on the licence. The company had historic compliance data with warnings, a public inquiry and prohibitions. Specific undertakings were added the licence following a previous public inquiry.

More recently, a “S” marked prohibition was issued to one of the operator’s trailers at the roadside, and a further prohibition was issued to the operator’s vehicle towing that trailer. This consequently triggered an investigation by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA). The results of DVSA’s Vehicle Examiner (VE) report were unsatisfactory, with compliance failures found. Due to previous assurances given by the operator at the time, DVSA did not refer their concerns to the Traffic Commissioner but arranged for a follow up investigation. A follow up Desk Based Assessment (DBA) was conducted into the systems for compliance with maintenance requirements and improvements made since the previous DVSA report. The DBA highlighted several shortcomings, and due to the repeated and serious nature of the findings in both reports, the case was referred to the Traffic Commissioner. The operator was called to a public inquiry.

Evidence

Papers were submitted in the public inquiry and the Traffic Commissioner was provided with a bundle from the operator in advance of the hearing. These included statements from the operator and maintenance documents that had been provided to the VE in advance of the public inquiry.

The operator did not challenge the DVSA Examiners’ evidence within the public inquiry.

The Traffic Commissioner firstly addressed the previous inquiry and that the operator had failed to notify the Traffic Commissioner of notifiable offences which were of high seriousness. The operator should have had their licence revoked with immediate effect, however, they were given a delay by the Traffic Commissioner to allow the company time to apply for a standard national licence which would require there to be a professional transport manager involved, and the Traffic Commissioner was assured that transport consultants would be contractually engaged and an audit carried out within 12 months.

The operator admitted that it had failed to notify the Traffic Commissioner that the company and its sole director had been convicted of serious offences, despite a licence condition requiring it to do so. The convictions were only notified to the Traffic Commissioner after the call to a public inquiry. The Traffic Commissioner did not accept the evidence that the operator did not know about this condition to notify.

Statements made by the operator when applying for the licence had not been fulfilled, namely that the vehicles would be inspected at the six-week intervals the operator promised, and that the operator would abide by licence conditions. The evidence that the operator had failed to fulfil these statements was uncontested.

There was also evidence that clearly showed the operator failed to comply with the undertakings on the licence, and that its vehicles and trailers would be kept in a fit and serviceable condition. The evidence provided to the Traffic Commissioner showed numerous prohibitions and poor initial MOT fail rates. Since the VE’s report and the subsequent DBA, there were further MOT failures, again for braking performance and tyre condition.

The operator failed to comply with the undertaking that it would keep proper safety inspection, driver defect reports and routine maintenance records. PMI reports were incomplete with insufficient detail of brake testing and tyre pressures not recorded and there were regular late PMI reports.

The operator failed to comply with the undertaking that drivers would promptly report defects that could prevent the safe operation of vehicles and/or trailers and that defects would be promptly recorded in writing. Instances of defects which should have been identified by drivers were found on PMI sheets and driver defect books had repeated defects recorded on subsequent dates with no evidence of timely assessment or repair.

Summing up

The Traffic Commissioner considered the appropriate starting point for regulatory action based on reference to the Senior Traffic Commissioner’s Statutory Document 10, and that revocation of the licence was necessary.

There were persistent operator licence failures with inadequate response. Many of the same failures identified by DVSA’s VE were again present at the time of the DBA and were still present and picked up by the VE in their update report for the inquiry hearing. There was ineffective management control and insufficient systems and procedures in place to prevent operator licence compliance failings, ineffective driver training with ineffective monitoring and disciplinary procedures in place, road safety critical defects, including “S” marked prohibitions and a low average first time pass rate at MOT.