Clayton Francis Jones t/a Street Buses

For a statutory defence of reasonable excuse, ordinary operational difficulties are assessed within the regulatory timetable and punctuality framework, while extraordinary events are considered on their individual merits. Operators must anticipate foreseeable difficulties before registering services and use the statutory procedures to vary or cancel registrations when later difficulties arise. Informal suspension of registered services does not provide a lawful alternative. A matter may be relevant in mitigation of penalty without amounting to a reasonable excuse. Appellate intervention requires the operator to show that the traffic commissioner’s decision was wrong.

The operator appealed against a decision of the Deputy Traffic Commissioner for Wales following a public inquiry. The Deputy Traffic Commissioner found failures to operate registered local bus services in accordance with their timetables, imposed penalties under the Transport Act 1985, curtailed the operator’s licence after an undertaking was not fulfilled, and issued a formal warning.

The operator accepted the failure to fulfil the undertaking. The principal issue was whether the surrounding circumstances, including delayed buses, ticketing-machine problems, road works and funding difficulties, amounted individually or collectively to a reasonable excuse for the poor punctuality.

1. Appeal dismissed. The operator had the burden of showing that the Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s decision was wrong.
2. The panel applied the approach in Diamond Bus Ltd T/2018/50. Reasonable excuse is a single-stage statutory inquiry. Ordinary occurrences are accommodated through the six-minute window and flexible 95 per cent punctuality rule. Extraordinary occurrences are considered on their own merits. The framework operates against the background that operators choose or accept the registered timetables and cannot depart from them at will.
3. Events foreseeable when services were registered should have been considered before the applications were made. Events arising later required the operator to use the statutory mechanisms for variation or cancellation under section 6 of the Transport Act 1985. Events arising after the monitoring period could not excuse performance during that period.
4. The delayed delivery of buses did not establish a reasonable excuse. The operator knew of supply difficulties before applying for the routes and had neither sourced alternatives nor made a compliant short-notice cancellation application. Ticketing-machine difficulties were not causative of the punctuality failures, and the evidence also indicated some contribution by the operator to the delay.
5. The alleged impact of the bridge closure was outside the monitoring period. Any preliminary works should have been addressed in the timetable if foreseeable, or by a formal variation application if they emerged later. Funding difficulties and the subsequent commercial decision to cancel services likewise did not amount to a reasonable excuse.
6. The absence of a reasonable excuse did not prevent the same matters from being mitigating circumstances when setting the penalty. The penalty of £400 per authorised vehicle was proportionate. The curtailment to one vehicle matched the operator’s request and the financial standing demonstrated. The formal warning was also proportionate and was endorsed.

• Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber): appeal against the Deputy Traffic Commissioner’s decision dated 15 February 2023 dismissed.