Xtreme Scaffolding Services Ltd has been refused a restricted goods vehicle operator’s licence in the North West of England. In a notice published on 7 November 2025, the Traffic Commissioner recorded that the one‑vehicle application was refused under section 13(5) of the Goods Vehicles (Licensing of Operators) Act 1995 after findings against sections 13B (fitness), 13C (compliance with undertakings) and 13D (financial resources).
The written decision confirms the public inquiry took place in Golborne on 22 October 2025, that the application (OC2081807) was made by Xtreme Scaffolding Services Ltd for authorisation of one vehicle, and that it was signed by Traffic Commissioner David Mullan on 27 October 2025 before publication on 6 November 2025.
Case management failings were central to the outcome. Despite being called to attend and directed to provide documents in advance, the applicant did not appear and failed to supply the requested material. The decision records that notices were properly served and cites Senior Traffic Commissioner Statutory Document 9 on adjournments before proceeding on the available evidence.
The Commissioner also examined links to earlier non‑compliant operations. The decision sets out that XP Scaffolding Ltd, associated with the same individuals, entered liquidation on 5 October 2023 owing £120,743, including liabilities to HMRC and a £45,000 Bounce Back Loan, with both XP vehicles acquired by the current applicant. The application was characterised as a ‘phoenix’ attempt to continue operations while avoiding liabilities.
Under the 1995 Act, restricted applications require the Commissioner to consider fitness and compliance (sections 13B and 13C) and, where appropriate, financial resources (section 13D). Where any considered requirement is not met, section 13(5) requires refusal. These are the statutory hooks relied upon in this case.
Financial standing was a specific focus. Senior Traffic Commissioner Statutory Document 2 directs checks on the availability of funds for restricted licences to ensure vehicle maintenance is not prejudiced, with reference levels of £3,100 for the first vehicle and £1,700 for each additional vehicle.
Training did not offset the concerns. Although both directors attended Operator Licence Awareness Training in May 2025, the Commissioner found this was insufficient to demonstrate that the statutory requirements were met given the wider compliance and engagement issues on the file.
For operators in construction and scaffolding, the decision reiterates that a restricted licence suits own‑account carriage but still demands robust systems for maintenance and compliance with drivers’ hours and other undertakings; unlike standard licences, a transport manager is not required.
Any future bid, the decision indicates, would need evidence of effective systems, current financial resources and sustained compliance. Statutory guidance on legal entities also signals close scrutiny of ‘phoenix’ or ‘fronting’ arrangements, including checks against company numbers and director histories to protect fair competition and road safety.