Republished article courtesy of DataGuidance, the Global Database for Data Protection and Privacy Compliance

The Article 29 Working Party (WP29) adopted – on 27 February 2013 – Opinion 02/2013 on apps held on smart devices, in which it cited a lack of transparency, free and informed consent, and disregard of the purpose limitation principle as some of the key data protection risks to end users. ‘Apps are able to collect large quantities of personal data from the device’, read the release. ‘This often happens without the free and informed consent of users, resulting in a breach of European data protection law.’

Phillip James, Partner at Pitmans SK Sport & Entertainment LLP, told DataGuidance: “For anyone involved in developing commercial strategies for smart devices, the WP29′s Opinion is a must read; ignore opinions such as this at your peril – see Path’s $800,000 fine by the Federal Trade Commission earlier this year.”

Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive requires consent from the user, having been provided with clear and comprehensive information, before the placing and retrieving of information from a device. Kasey Chappelle, Global Privacy Counsel for Vodafone, said: “This important guidance from our regulators needs to be looked at in tandem with the work the mobile industry has done to meet consumer expectations on how their personal information is used on their devices, like the GSMA’s Mobile Privacy Initiative and the resulting Privacy Design Guidelines for Mobile Apps and Accountability framework.”

A GSMA survey prepared in September 2011 showed that 92% of all users had concerns when applications collected personal data without their consent.

The WP29 stated that many apps either do not have a privacy policy or fail to inform users in a meaningful way about the type of personal data the app may process and for what purposes. Pat Walshe, Director of Privacy at the GSMA, said: “The WP29 is sending a message that you cannot bury key terms in long legalistic privacy policies and expect that this amounts to ‘consent’ to access information stored on a users’ mobile phone or collect sensitive data not related to the purpose of the app”.

The WP29 refers to a previous Opinion (10/2004) on the benefits of layered notices to adequately inform end users of an app’s data collection practices to circumvent the limitations of how much information can be presented on a small screen. “Just-in-time consent is the watchword”, said James. “By providing the necessary information at the most relevant moment, a user is likely to take notice. However, just-in-time consent is not the silver bullet. It is one piece of a larger, complex jigsaw”.

User consent must also be ‘specific’ and ‘simply clicking an install button cannot be regarded as valid consent for the processing of personal data [as it] cannot be a generally formulated authorisation’. Whilst clicking ‘Install’ can fulfil the consent requirement under Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive, the WP29 states ‘it is unlikely to provide sufficient information in order to act as valid consent of the processing of personal data’. The Opinion recommends a granular approach, where consent is sought for each type of data the app intends to access.

“Whether further and additional consents are required is dependent on a number of factors and very much depends on context,” said Walshe. “For example, installing an app to locate my nearest cash machine – my consent is implicit in the act of installing the app and demanding that my device be located. The only time I would expect to provide additional consent is if the app wished to use my location for purposes outside of its original purpose – for example, to advertise location based offers to me, or to build a profile of my movements when not making direct requests to be located.”

Chappelle said: “We do have some concerns about the extent to which the regulators’ guidance relies solely on consent as the justification for applications’ data use. This is why we work with our developers to find effective ways to design privacy into apps that comply with regulatory requirements, give customers meaningful choices and are as transparent and consumer-friendly as possible.”

The WP29 warns, that fulfilling the conditions of valid consent does not give an app license for unfair and unlawful processing, and must respect the principles of purpose limitation and data minimisation.

Other elements addressed by the Opinion include issues of security, and children’s data, as well as the responsibility of the actors in the mobile app ecosystem – developers, OS and device manufacturers, app stores and third parties.

Courtesy of Thames Valley Business Magazine February 2013

Angela Shields, Director, and Jenny Littlewood, Solicitor, of the Pitmans LLP employment department discuss the significant employment law changes from 2012 and review the proposed changes for 2013 in an interview with Clara Barber.

Clara Barber (CB): What do you think was the most significant change to employment law during 2012 ?

Angela Shields (AS): Well, it was another busy year for employment law, when is it not ? I would consider the increase from one to two years for those claiming unfair dismissal (where their employment commenced on or after 6th April 2012) to be the most significant change during the last year. Going forward, as employees change their jobs, we are likely to see an increase in alternative claims being pursued by employees. The alternative claims are likely to be for automatic unfair dismissal cases such as whistle blowing cases (where there is no need for the person to have been employed for any continuing period). We will also see an increase in claims, such as, discrimination.

Jenny Littlewood (JL): A significant change arising from case law is in the interaction of annual leave and sickness absence. It is an area often raised by employers with us and the Court of Appeal decided that where a worker has been unable to take annual leave due to sickness absence during a calendar year, the statutory four weeks annual leave entitlement can be carried forward into the next leave year. We don’t know at the moment whether the concept of a “carry forward” period is open ended or whether there is a long stop date. We are waiting for guidance on the issue from the Government when they review the Working Time Regulations.

AS: There was also an interesting case regarding a contractual payment in lieu of notice. An employer who had paid a payment in lieu of notice to an employee, in accordance with the contract of employment, could not avoid payment after the dismissal, when they later found that the employee had committed a fundamental breach of the contract. In order to claw back any payment in lieu, there should be an express contractual clause included in the contract.

CB: With the introduction in January 2013 of “one in, two out” for new employment laws, what would you choose to highlight as one to watch in 2013?

AS: The headline-grabbing Employee Shareholder arrangement is to be a key development in 2013. The arrangement is planned for introduction in April 2013. It is proposed that employees will give up some of their employment rights in exchange for shares in a Company.  Any growth in value of the shares on their disposal will be exempt from Capital Gains Tax.

In exchange, the Company will issue or allot a minimum of £2,000 worth of shares to the employee shareholder. The employee shareholder would have the same rights as an employee but would not be entitled to:

• request time off for study or training;
• make a flexible working request;
• claim unfair dismissal(except in some circumstances);
• a statutory redundancy payment; and

finally an employee shareholder must give 16 weeks notice if they want to return early from statutory maternity, adoption or additional maternity leave.

One point of interest, will be determining the value of shares on the termination of arrangement. I can foresee some tricky situations arising on valuation of shares which is normally an expensive exercise.

JL: A recent Government announcement will affect Companies who are considering a collective redundancy process to dismiss 100 or more employees. They will need to consult with affected employees for a 45 day period instead of 90.

Another issue beneficial to an Employer is the abolition of discrimination questionnaires. The questionnaire procedure was sometimes misused by an employee causing wasted time and costs. However, there is an alternative view that a discrimination questionnaire could settle issues arising between the parties at an early stage which is being actively encouraged in all other areas of litigation. We will have to wait and see whether the abolition of the questionnaires will affect the number of discrimination claims.

CB: Are there any proposed changes that might reduce the number of Employment Tribunal claims?

AS: It is anticipated that the introduction of a fees regime to the Employment Tribunal system will reduce the overall number of claims pursued.

JL: Another issue that may assist employers is the proposal that pre-termination negotiations will be inadmissible in respect of unfair dismissal claims. Therefore, if an employer is going to negotiate directly with an employee it will be free to do so.

AS: It will certainly prove to be another interesting year for those dealing with employment rights and issues.

Angela Shields
Director
T: 0118 957 0450
E: ashields@pitmans.com

Jenny Littlewood
Solicitor
T: 0118 957 0257
E: jlittlewood@pitmans.com

Courtesy of Thames Valley Business Magazine February 2013

For many Thames Valley based businesses, 2013 is a year for optimism, opportunity, growth and investment

What could 2013 offer you and your business?

Respondents to Pitmans’ Annual “Funding your Business” Survey, conducted in December 2012, clearly felt the UK economy would remain in recession for the majority of 2013, but it is against this backdrop that over 76% of Thames Valley based respondents said that they anticipate a year of steady growth in 2013. This is a marked contrast to respondents from businesses which lie outside of the Thames Valley region, 60% of whom forecast trade at similar levels as 2012.

The Thames Valley has long been labelled the economic powerhouse of the UK, thanks largely to its diversity, strong skills based and excellent infrastructure – attracting top talent and global businesses from software, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, utility and construction sectors.

87% of survey respondents had a positive and open attitude towards obtaining finance from non-traditional sources – this was significantly greater in Non-Thames Valley based business in 2012 compared to 2011 while Thames Valley based respondents remained consistently positive. There is a marked enthusiasm for other sources of finance including crowd funding, stock market flotation and venture capital, as well as borrowing from friends and family.

Despite numerous public sector initiatives, only 14% of survey respondents stated that they would consider applying government grants, this is a small increase from 11% in 2011.

Cash is king and many business leaders across the Thames Valley have been gearing their operations to capitalise on future market developments by investing cash to drive down debt and to improve their financial position such that they could acquire weaker competitors. This suggests a buoyant attitude in an uncertain economy, where opportunities in the market are sought out and solid foundations laid down for growth in the years ahead.

What are you doing with your cash at present? (survey respondents were asked to select all that applied)

• 40% of all survey respondents are using existing cash to fund their daily operations to reduce their debt. This is an increase from 30% in 2011.
• Funding growth remains a popular choice – with 27% of respondents (a small increase from 23% in 2011). This may be indicative of greater market confidence.

85% of survey respondents stated that they believe that their funder understands their business. This is however a reduction in confidence against the previous year.

Does your funder understand your business?

The majority of Thames Valley based survey respondents stated that they will remain loyal to their existing funders. This suggests that relationships may have continued to strengthen as a result of the difficult economic environment, that loyalty is a two way street. This also suggests that funders are striving to understand their customers, recognising their challenges and adapting to suit the demands of the market.

Over 38% of respondents who are Thames Valley based stated their funder was ‘excellent’.

Confidence in funders’ supporting the needs of business remains strongest among Finance Directors, as 70% of Finance Directors participating in the survey scored their funder as being supportive of their business.

How helpful has your funder been in supporting your business in 2012?

Cash flow is always a concern for any business, large or small. However, the majority of business leaders participating in this survey stated that they believe their firm effectively manages debt collection. They support this by intimating that they do not anticipate the failure of clients to pay as having a great impact upon their business. The optimisation of debt collection practices has been necessitated by the economic climate, forcing companies to rationalise, and automate processes to reduce overhead and supplier costs. Nonetheless more companies are vetting their clients in advance of supplying them with credit facilities.

Whilst many look to 2013 with uncertain eyes, participants of the survey suggested various ideas to improve the economy and create the spark required to ignite the regional economy.

Survey participants suggested many ways of that the government could help them over the forthcoming 12 months including:

• “Reduction in Corporation Tax”
• “Return of the RDA’s”
• “Reduction in VAT”
• “Less red tape”
• “Increased support for transportation and infrastructure”
• “Incentives for part time working and related subsides”
• “Easier access to bank finance”
• “Incentives for Private Equity investments”

So where will support come from to fuel growth for Thames Valley businesses in 2013? Clearly strong management teams, innovation and enterprise require healthy relationships with funders to form the infrastructure required for growth.

For a summary report of the survey, please click here.

Patrick Long
Banking & Finance Partner
T: 0118 957 0488
E: plong@pitmans.com

This article was first published by Festival Magazine, and is reproduced by kind permission.

Festivals are unique gatherings. They are culturally and economically significant, but the production, operation and running of such events is complex and involves a balance between creative spontaneity and regulatory compliance.

It’s probably true to say that, if most festival founders fully appreciated the responsibilities they would face down the line, they wouldn’t have started. But it’s a people business and building a committed, professional team around an event is the key to continued success.

That said, and excluding the provision of food and beverages, here are just some of the things an event organiser needs to understand.

Under the Occupiers Liability Act 1957, an occupier of a venue or greenfield site owes a duty of care, in all circumstances as is reasonable, to see that those on site, whether festival goers, guests or workers, will be reasonably safe.

Responsibility for the management of risks for the safe set-up, delivery and take down of the entire event rests with the event organiser, the manager and/or owner of the venue, licensee and/or promoter, depending upon the contractual arrangements under which the event is to be run.

Knowing precisely who is responsible for what is vital and control may be shared between a number of parties or imposed on one party by law. So there needs to be close liaison and communication to ensure that responsibilities are clearly identified and assigned.

Under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, all entertainment events are classed as work activities and subject to the Act. Event organisers, concert promoters, licensees, specialist contractors and venue owners all have a statutory duty to protect the health and safety of their workers and others who may be affected by their work activity.

The Act is relevant for suppliers of equipment or substances for use at work and that applies to designers and suppliers of equipment for use by performers, and to contractors who install stages and sound systems. There is also a duty on employers and self-employed people to safeguard those not in their employment, for example the public.

If you’re an aspiring festival promoter and still reading this, then congratulations. Pulling off a successful festival is a fine example of the need to balance flexibility and common sense. There is, by nature, a clash between creativity and the ranks of regulatory forces.

Regulations and responsibilities aside, a successful event should be well planned and have a solid contractual framework. This will make for a much more safe and fun event all round.

Nigel Dewar Gibb
Partner Music and Media, Pitmans SK Sport & Entertainment LLP
T: 0207 634 4629
E: ndewargibb@pitmanssk.com

Pitmans Tossers were in action again this Shrove Tuesday in the annual Broad Street Pancake Race in aid of LaunchPad Reading.

Tosser veterans Andrew Souter and Alex Morgan took it upon themselves to rejuvenate a deflated team after last year’s shock first round exit by drafting in rookies, Nicholas Drew and Rachel Clayton-Brown. Together this conglomeration of wily experience and youthful exuberance created the perfect synergy, and as the date approached the expectation mounted.

Team Captain Morgan led from the front by taking the first leg of the first race. Drawing on his background in motor sport his steely determination was apparent for all to see as he settled himself on the start line. Pulse quickening, vision sharpening, he waited for the starting pistol. With lightening quick acceleration he almost single handedly gave the Tossers their first victory of the day.

The Tossers dispatched their next two opponents in emphatic style with Drew’s deft touch and Clayton-Brown taking advantage of her opponent’s sloppy pancake tossing to hand the frying pan to Souter who employed the same rapid explosion of pace that once made him the 1993 Sandal Endowed Junior School 100m Gold Medallist.

As they lined up for the semi final, victory was in sight for the Tossers, a team who have, in years gone by, tasted the sweet golden nectar of victory. But an icy gust of wind took hold of their pancake mid toss which fell limply to the floor dashing the Tossers’ hopes of once again becoming the Champions of Broad Street.

The Tossers retired to devour some pancakes with their heads held high having reclaimed their pride.

Captain Morgan commented: “The team did a fantastic job and managed to gel extremely well on a tight timescale. Many underestimated us but we showed grit and determination to reach the semi-final, and restored pride to the Pitmans team after last year’s disastrous round 1 exit. I am looking forward to next year and hope that the team sticks together to build upon the solid foundations already created”.

L to R: Andrew Souter, Rachel Clayton-Brown, Alex Morgan, Nicholas Drew

Answer 4 simple questions online and you could win a lunch for 2 at L’ortolan, Reading’s only Michelin starred restaurant.

Click here to answer the questions.

Competition closes at 5:00pm on Monday 1st April 2013.

Terms and conditions apply. See here for details.

Let’s talk about employment. We’re thinking of you. 

At Pitmans we believe that your performance both at work and at play can be enhanced through training. To show you we care, we’re inviting you to our free seminars for Managers and HR professionals – giving you updates on employment law and top tips on managing your most important asset – your people.

21 March 2013
Employment Law Clinic
What are the burning issues you would like to speak to an employment lawyer about?
Your chance to speak to us one on one about anything employment related.
Catch up on the latest and forthcoming HR changes.
Register your place

25 June 2013
Leadership and Change
How to lead workplace change successfully?
Implementing change – the legal tips.
Register your place

17 October 2013
Mock Employment Tribunal
Ever wondered what happens at an Employment Tribunal Hearing? Here is your chance to find out.
A mock hearing conducted by Barristers from Lamb Chambers.
Followed by a Q&A session.
Register your place

———————————————————————————————————————–

Win lunch for two!

Answer 4 simple questions online and you could win a lunch for 2 at Reading’s only Michelin starred restaurant.

Click here to answer the questions.

Competition closes at 5:00pm on Monday 1st April 2013.

Terms and conditions apply. See here for details.

———————————————————————————————————————–

On 7 February 2013, Pitmans hosted their second Annual Cyber Conference following the success of 2012′s event. This year’s conference focused on reputation management, cyber risk management and information security. Delegates were invited to interact with two expert cyber security panels to generate debates and identify the true issues that businesses and individuals are facing in todays digital world.

Philip James, Partner and Joint Head of Technology at Pitmans chaired the conference. Amongst seven key messages, Phil highlighted that security incidents have significant repercussions for business reputation, described as the ‘Reputation Ripple’ effect. Phil also warned that the costs and liabilities to which companies are exposed have an ‘Iceberg’ effect, with public fines seeming significant and high profile, but the real cost of the breach is hidden. Further details of the Chairman’s introduction can be found here.

Professor Sadie Creese, Professor of Cybersecurity at the University of Oxford, gave the opening keynote, and was followed by technology, legal and risk specialists. Professor Creese raised far more issues and challenges than can possibly be dealt with in this summary; however, of particular note was the need to understand the ‘Threat Environment’ fully. This led to a wider panel discussion, revealing that often those tasked with security in organisations are the technical people (e.g. IT Director); technical experts will often focus on requesting a technical service (e.g. a penetration test) rather than posing a wider question which deals with the macro threat environment. This also might be because many suppliers cannot address security perimeters from both a risk and business context. In terms of future and current research, the University’s team have been examining the insider threat. Even though recent reports, such as the Verizon report, have indicated from breach statistics that insider incidents have fallen, analysts have interpreted this as a result of the reluctance of organisations to report breaches arising from insider deception. Accordingly, focus has been shifted onto psychological mapping and predictive profiling to attempt to identify individuals who may present a vulnerability. It was pointed out that the ‘hacker’, more often than not, turns out to be a regular man or woman on the street (and does not necessarily look like a ninja).

Ultimately, organisations will need to approach cyber security as a means of survival (not just a compliance or regulatory issue). In addition, the term, ‘cyber’ may in fact be misleading as the security issues raised are far more than technical and digital. They are as much behavioural, for instance.

John Bassett OBE summed up the conference very efficiently. John highlighted the importance of an incident response plan. He recommended that a cyber incident drill be carried out at least once, but ideally twice, every year. An incident response team should be developed, comprising a multi-disciplinary team of experts, ranging from HR, PR/Comms and IT. By preparing for an incident beforehand, the benefits which an organisation can enjoy are exponential. Failure to prepare will almost certainly result in mismanagement and significantly greater adverse repercussions. A response team’s authority should, however, be closely delineated so as to avoid its tenure running longer than required. It is important to resume ‘normal’ business as soon as possible.

In between these two key notes, two panel sessions examined a mock incident and issues to consider in supply chains. James Chappell, CTO, Digital Shadows, demonstrated the importance of foreseesing risk by monitoring external social networks and forums. Interestingly, James pointed out that, whilst much criticism had been centred on outsourced providers, many external providers can offer superior knowledge, security and expertise (and that this can be easily forgotten when weighing up the security risks). Eddie Bensilum, Director at Regester Larkin, expertly demonstrated the fundamental importance of taking experienced counsel from a reputation management and communications specialist. In doing so, it is important to decide whether to place a company’s Managing Director, Chairman or CEO on the podium to answer to the media. This is not always the most sensible course and appointing a senior member of the management team to handle any questions and deflect criticism can help protect an organisation’s leader.

Nick Baskett from Matta also made the point that a security breach may be reported by different departments. He also discussed the importance of doing incident preparedness and reviewing how your company conducts logging of data across your network.

Adam Piper, from Griffiths & Armour, and Laurence Rossini, CFC Underwriting, also held an invaluable session explaining the differences between traditional risk cover and specialist cyber insurance. In particular, Adam and Laurence explained that the issue should be dealt with on the Board’s Agenda. A risk assessment should be undertaken and three crucial questions asked:

1. Is Cyber Risk on the Board Agenda?
2. Have you quantified the Cyber risk exposure?
3. Does your organisation have a Cyber Risk strategy?

The conference raised a wide range of issues and stimulated great debate. Further sessions are planned to continue the themes that were introduced. If you wish to be involved in the next event in this series, please email poppy@pitmans.com.

For further discussion of this event, future workshops on Cyber Risk Management or other issues, please contact:

Philip James
Partner & Joint Head of Technology
T: 0207 634 4655
E: pjames@pitmans.com

Pitmans’ Cyber Risk Management team

Pitmans’ Data Privacy & Information Law team

Pitmans’ Technology team

Pitmans LLP, the Thames Valley’s leading law firm, is delighted to announce a new partnership with the Egyptian legal practice, Levari. It is Pitmans’ first venture into the Middle East, and marks an important milestone in the firm’s delivery of legal services and international aspirations. For Levari, too, this marks a significant development and establishes them as a competitive force in the Egyptian legal service industry from the outset.

Levari, with offices in Sharm el Sheikh and Cairo, is headed by Partners Sherif Hefni and Mohamed Raslan. Both have significant experience in the Middle East, specialising in commercial, corporate and foreign investments advising clients from America, England and South Africa. However, like Pitmans, Levari is a full service law firm. For individuals, Levari will introduce a Legal Plan product unique to the Egyptian market which will provide clients with access to legal advice and translation services for an annual fee. Levari will work with Pitmans to undertake commercial and corporate work on international transactions for companies based around the world who invest in Egypt and be in a position to support individual clients who have interests in both England and Egypt.

The value in the association stems from the ability for Pitmans and Levari to provide a specialist service to clients who operate in both England and Egypt. Both Pitmans and Levari share an ethos focused on client service and the delivery of pragmatic, commercial legal advice, distinguishing Levari from other Egyptian law firms currently operating in Cairo and Sharm El Sheikh.

Sherif Hefni, co-founder and partner of Levari, says: “We are honoured to join in association with Pitmans, in its first venture in the Middle East.  As a new law firm, Levari has the adaptability and client focus to excel in Egypt, and being backed by Pitmans allows us to provide clients from across the Middle East with UK quality legal services and cross border advice.”

Pitmans Partner David Archer, says: “Pitmans is delighted to enter into this association with Levari Law. We are committed to helping our clients and contacts throughout the Middle East. Levari Law is an important new firm and Egypt naturally enjoys a key and powerful role beyond its region. We are impressed with the credentials and commitment to client service of Levari Law.”

For further information on Levari, please visit their website – www.levarilaw.com

Courtesy of Thames Valley Business Magazine December 2012

Thames Valley businessman Adrian Pulleyn started Pulleyn Transport in the 1970s with just £300 to purchase his first truck. From this modest start he has grown the business to become a leading specialist logistic and transportation company. He has over the years diversified into nightclubs, restaurants, pubs and property, but always staying true to his core values. He has built a business that today turns over approximately £10m and is now run by two of his sons.

Adrian was asked about his experience as a businessman/entrepreneur by Christopher Avery, Managing Partner of Pitmans LLP.

Have you always wanted to run your own business?

Yes, I started out at 16 as a schooleaver. I’ve always wanted to better myself and I suppose that is what drove me. I’ve been a meat porter, a slaughterer and a scaffolder. But I think it was when I got into Truck driving that I found my niche. I knew I liked it.

So how did you start your business?

I had been working for Firestone Racing Division fitting tyres to all types of racing cars across Europe and other parts of the world. It was an exciting job – glamorous travel, certainly not run of the mill for a former meat packer. It was 1975. Times were tight, recession had kicked in and I was made redundant. This made me think right, I’m going to carry on driving with the knowledge that I had picked up of customs documentation which in those days was quite complicated, and I’m going to be my own boss. So I bought a truck for £300 and asked for work from people I knew and canvassed lots of electronics companies in the Thames Valley.

What do you think was your first big break?

We focused on express European deliveries – the tricky stuff, taking difficult and fragile to move equipment such as heavy computer servers and professional television equipment across Europe. It was 1975. Servers were really heavy and yet delicate equipment. We promised to deliver on time, no matter how challenging the transport would be. We always delivered.

What sort of help did you have in the early years?

None for free. There weren’t regional growth funds in those days, no grants nor incentives. You had to work hard, work long hours, think creatively and take every opportunity that was available. You had to take risks. You had to make and take opportunities. I think being in the Thames Valley which had become the Silicon Valley of the UK helped as freight flew into Heathrow and needed to be moved.

What about Professional Support? Did you receive good advice?

I found that having a good relationship with my banker was critical, having a good relationship with my accountant was important and getting on well with my lawyers was intelligent. I’ve worked with Pitmans for many years, helping me start up and sell businesses.

Who taught you money management?

No one taught me. But I’ve asked questions and I’ve taken advice. You know money is going to be tight, and we were dealing with multiple currencies, with fluctuating fuel prices and on very tight margins.

At one point I was waiting for the market to bounce so that I could sell a site in Rose Kiln Lane. A couple of bids failed to land, the bank panicked and were slapping on charges. Regulation across Europe was making it harder and harder to get paid quickly.  I had to take short term lets on the Rose Kiln Lane site to pay the bills. It’s been hard but I like to get things right. I take care of the details and I don’t get too greedy. That’s the secret of my success.

What in your view are the defining characteristics of an Entrepreneur?

I think it’s someone who works hard and gets stuck in. You have to be prepared to do everything, work long hours and drive forward by taking risks. I’m also a bit of a stickler for getting things right. I don’t like to leave anything to chance.

So you started Pulleyn Transport in 1975. Can you take us through the next few years? What happened?

We grew, we were growing with the technology industry, transporting equipment across Europe and beyond. By the mid 1980s I had 20 trucks and employed 30 people. As technology became smaller and easier to move, we then diversified into other industries. We transported chilled and frozen food, specialising in moving products which other carriers found difficult.

We innovated through developing new trucks with two fridges on board. This might sound simplistic but margins in this trade are tight. You can’t afford for a fridge to fail because you won’t get paid if the goods don’t reach their destination in perfect condition. By having 2 refrigerated units on board you can be certain that you can take frozen or chilled products through sub-tropical climates to their destination on time and without failure. We also developed a satellite tracking system for temperature control, although this is more recent. It helps us prove to our customers that the temperature of their goods has remained constant, and therefore we deliver what they want. And we get paid quicker as a result.

I understand you have also entered into the pharmaceutical trade?

Ah, yes, bio pharmaceuticals are important to us. We carry chilled pharmaceutical products across Europe to our clients. You know regulation for this has been a challenge. These vaccines have short lives, they are temperature sensitive and the rules for transporting them across Europe are quite something. But the devil is in the detail. Pulleyn Transport delivers specialist logistics. Pharmaceuticals are a great part of that.

So what are your plans now?

Well I’ve bought property before, buying Sindlesham Mill back in the 1980s. That was quite an endeavour. I’d never run a pub, restaurant or nightclub before, and it was hard work but very enjoyable. And very successful. It gave me the confidence, and the cash, to buy other property for our transport business – in Rose Kiln Lane, Reading and then our site at Three Mile Cross. Owning the freehold has been important to me. I’m ready to look at more property purchases in the future.

If you could leave one piece of advice for the entrepreneurs/businessmen of tomorrow?

Work hard, stay focused, keep your eyes on the details and take controlled risks. There are opportunities in every market and every economy and I am a great believer that recessions are a great time to start a business because you have everything to go for but just remember that friends you make on the way up you may need on the way down.

If you could ask George Osbourne (Father Christmas) for one thing, what would it be?

George – you don’t have to be a brain surgeon! Just a good businessman – bring back capital allowances!

We need to get industry moving, and that is only going to happen if people like me invest. Capital Allowances help me to do that. I’d buy more trucks and trailers tomorrow…

Christopher Avery and Adrian Pulleyn

Christopher Avery
Managing Partner
T: 0118 957 0248
E: cavery@pitmans.com