1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244 
Improved maintenance wins licence
Page 85
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Mr A. H. Jolliffe, the North-Western deputy LA, granted three suction tankers and a tipping vehicle on a 12-month 0 licence to Waste Services (Preston) Ltd, in Manchester last week, after he had heard that, despite staff and financial problems, the company had still succeeded in improving its vehicle maintenance conditions.
Mr K. Sumner, transport manager, told the deputy LA that since the time the last inquiry was adjourned the company had run into financial difficulties. This had resulted in a meeting of the firm's creditors, following which both the company's principal and the transport manager resigned. Mr Sumner, who until that time had been a driver with the company, was then promoted to transport manager.
When asked by Mr Jolliffe what maintenance arrangements the company had made, Mr Sumner said that each of the four vehicles to be licensed was given a monthly inspection by Mr M. Seed, a qualified full-time mechanic employed by the company. He went on to say that the company's premises where the repairs and inspections were carried out had good facilities including a pit. But this flooded periodically and had to be emptied by one of the suction vehicles before it could be used.
In his evidence, Mr H. Singleton, an MoT vehicle examiner, told Mr Jolliffe that out of four vehicles examined some months ago two were issued with immediate GV9s and one with a delayed GV9.