Tizer's licence goes flat
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Although Tizer Ltd, the Manchesterbased soft drink manufacturing company, had what appeared to be a perfectly adequate vehicle maintenance system it "broke down" in respect of its Wednesbury, Staffordshire, depot as a result of poor management.
This was claimed at a public inquiry in Birmingham on Tuesday when the company was called before the West Midland LA, Mr John Else under Section 69.
Mr A. K. Pierce, a DoE vehicle examiner, told the LA that after a routine check earlier this year he had carried out a fleet inspection of 14 vehicles and two :railers at the Wednesbury depot. He found :hat the vehicles were in a poor condition and issued one immediate and three delayed prohibition notices. A majority of the lefects discovered affected the braking ;ystems of the vehicles and when drivers' laily defect report sheets were checked it was shown that although braking defects aad been recorded these had not been rectified until several days after the original iefects had been reported.
The maintenance facilities at the depot he ;aid, consisted of a workshop with covered accommodation for two vehicles, adequate equipment and tools and a maintenance pit, although there was some difficulty in positioning vehicles over the pit.
Mr W. C. Sproat, sales director, explained that in the past 18 months there had been three managers at the depot and in that time the maintenance system had slipped. As a temporary measure, a manager from the Manchester branch had been appointed until a replacement could be found and trained.
The LA said that he felt the firm was not directly responsible, but there had been a breakdown in its maintenance system. He decided to curtail the licence, which originally authorized 36 vehicles and four trailers in the West Midland traffic area, by removing the nine vehicles and two trailers which had not been acquired and then further suspended the licence by deleting seven vehicles for three months.
The LA commented that there may be a slight anomaly in the Transport Act 1968 because if he were to revoke the entire licence held by the company in the West Midland traffic area it would cause little difficulty as vehicles authorized in margins on nine other licences could be used to replace those withdrawn.