AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Re-licenced after revocation

25th July 1991, Page 17
25th July 1991
Page 17
Page 17, 25th July 1991 — Re-licenced after revocation
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?

• Brinley Bevan & Son was not one of the success stories to come out of the South Wales Traffic Area's recommended maintenance system, said South Wales LA John Mervyn Pugh, when he revoked the firm's licence. However, he immediately granted the Blanenavon-based firm a fresh fivevehicle/six-trailer licence until August 1992, saying the last thing he wanted to do was to close the company down when the recession was hitting hard.

Partner Brinley Bevan agreed that this was the firm's third appearance before the LA. He said that before 1986 it had a well equipped garage, but it was compulsorily purchased and a legal dispute had arisen over the new site. A court hearing is due in two to three months time.

Prohibition notices on the firm's vehicles were mainly be cause of damage caused to tyres while carrying baled scrap from Ebbw Vale and Port Talbot to the Llanwern steelworks, said Bevan. This problem had been overcome by keeping a substantial stock of tyres.

He agreed that the firm's maintenance had probably been only 85% efficient because vehicles off the road had not been checked.

Mervyn Pugh said the vehicle examiner's report indicated some neglect as tyres were not being immediately replaced

when damaged. He suggested that tyres be inspected over a pit each evening, that weekly safety inspections be carried out and that the firm join the Freight Transport Association.

Accepting the suggestion of daily tyre checks, Bevan said that weekly inspections were not practical with its present set up. However, he would strictly adhere to inspections every two weeks, ensure that vehicles off the road were inspected before they were put back into service. and would have the fleet MoT tested every six months.

Mervyn Pugh noted that there had been no prohibitions since October and suggested that it might be in the firm's interests to write to the steel companies about the appalling carelessness of distributing bits of steel around their yards.

He did not want to destroy the business, but he did want it to operate safely.