AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Defect notices were put aside

23rd February 1995
Page 22
Page 22, 23rd February 1995 — Defect notices were put aside
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 :

1 -. Worthing

based Trevor Martin, trading as Chrisleigh Plants, has been warned that further maintenance problems could result in the loss of his licence. South Eastern and Metropolitan LA Brigadier Michael Turner cut the duration of the licence to expire at the end of September. Martin, who delivers house plants in Sussex, said he had held a licence since 1981. He operated one vehicle, a specially adapted Bedford box van. When he was stopped in a spot check last April his vehicle received a delayed prohibition for a defective tyre and a defect notice for having a tyre nearly down to the legal limit, cracked and bent mirrors and a twisted bumper. Vehicle examiner Leonard Stirling said that 10 days later, though the defective tyre had been replaced, the tyre listed in the defect notice had fallen below the legal limit and he issued another delayed prohibition. Nothing had been done to rectify the faults listed on the defect notice. It appeared to him that Martin regarded a defect notice as a warning that matters needed attention some time in the future rather than an urgent message that they needed to be put right in the next few days. Turner commented that the whole point of a defect notice was one of preventative maintenance, "to nip faults in the bud before they became really serious and dangerous". Stirling said the whole maintenance system appeared haphazard, with far too many inspection records missing without any satisfactory explanation. Martin had been sent a warning letter in August 1992 about gaps in the inspection records. There were apparently large gaps in the records in 1993 and 1994, there was no proper driver defect reporting system, and there appeared to be a low standard of daily checks. Questioned about a county court judgement over an outstanding maintenance bill, Martin said the money was owed to his previous maintenance contractor. He was in dispute with them over a major item on the bill, a gearbox which had cost twice as much as the estimate.

Indicating that he was unhappy with the overall situation, Turner said there would be a further maintenance investigation in September. If that report was found to be unsatisfactory, no further licence would be issued.