Page 148 - 5. 2015 New 26-05-21 No Table

Q All right. Just to make Mr Cordell’s position plain, I
accept you formed the impression that he was working.
But he told you he wasn’t. Yes?
A Yes. Ultimately over the course of that interaction he
did dispute that, yes.
Q And when you say that at the outset of the
conversation, he told you he was working, I suggest
you’re being dishonest?
A No. I would reject that.
Q And the reason that he got arrested and the van seized
rather than a fixed penalty notice — you say it’s
because he was being un-co-operative?
Yes?
A In terms of the seizure?
Q In terms of why this wasn’t dealt with by way of a
fixed penalty notice, why it was dealt with in terms of
him being arrested and then the van needing to be
seized.
A Yes. He was being un-co-operative.
Q Because you say he was being un-co-operative. I
suggest to you he was standing his ground saying “I
haven’t been working here” and was saying “Why are
you lying to my insurance company?”
A I don’t — I don’t recall him saying that I’d lied to the
insurance company.
THE You certainly hadn’t told them the truth, had you, on
RECORDER: the face of it?
A I certainly acknowledge there’s a discrepancy there,
your Honour.
THE Yes.
RECORDER:
MR Thank you. Nothing further.
KENNEDY: Re-examined by MR POTTINGER
Q Did you — you said he became un-co-operative and at
a later stage claimed that he was looking for work
rather than working?
Is that right?
A Yes.
Q Had you mentioned the insurance before he — in terms
of him saying that he was actually looking for work
rather than working, can you help us when that change
happened?
A As soon as — for me anyway, as soon as I’d asked —
as soon as I’d asked for his documents initially and
he’d said “Oh, you know, I’m busy. I’m just going to
go in there and do some work” for me the — the
suspicion was there, “Well, I need to make sure on the
insurance that it covers him for...” — “...for business”
and then of