AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Haulier told: better messy maintenance

19th April 1980, Page 8
19th April 1980
Page 8
Page 8, 19th April 1980 — Haulier told: better messy maintenance
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Keywords : Levin

A LIVERPOOL haulier has been given six months in which to put his "messy" business in order. The North Western Deputy Licensing Authority heard that James Cooper's maintenance facilities and records did not meet expected requirements.

Vehicle examiner Kenneth Hopley told Deputy LA J. Levin that he had looked into three vehicle prohibitions in March and May 1979, all of which alleged neglect. There were no underneath inspec.tion facilities and the workshop was untidy and poorly lit: No records of inspection for the trailers were produced and the vehicle records were neither signed nor dated. He issued immediate prohibitions against one vehicle and a • trailer for 20 defects in total.

Questioned by Mrs Anne Prestt for Cooper, Mr Hopley denied that he imposed the prohibition on the trailer when it was under repair. He did not know that the trailer had been brought in for repair by ' driver and he denied that e. imposed the prohibition after the defects had been repaired.

He added that the workshop had been tidied up and adequate lighting installed. Temporary maintenance arrangements had been made with another operator.

Mr Cooper had said he had never needed an inspection pit, but Mr Levin commented that his record might mean that if Mr Cooper did not look he did not see. A pit was always adviseable.

Prematurely terminating the 0-licence so that it expired in November, Mr Levin said his overall impression was that the business was messy, badly run and badly organised.


comments powered by Disqus