Maintenance before contract, warns LA
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Cartransport (BRS) Ltd, the Coventry. based subsidiary of BRS, appeared before the Metropolitan LA last week to have an application to vary its 0 licence and at the same time to show cause under Section 69 following a series of GV9s issued on the vehicles already operated.
The company, it was stated by its representative, Mr D. Keene, operated eight vehicles and eight trailers from Dunstable and six vehicles and trailers on an interim icence from Luton. It was now required to add 10 more vehicles and trailers with an extra margin of two to be acquired. This was because the company had acquired a contract to transport all Chrysler's production of home sales cars and output had since increased by 50 per cent.
From June last year to February this all vehicles had been maintained by Swann Garages (Hitchin) Ltd and this had proved satisfactory until five new trailers were )ought to supplement other units transerred from another subsidiary. These had had to be modified and the extra work, explained Mr Keene had caused problems which culminated in GV9s.
Mr I. W. Atkinson, a vehicle examiner, gave evidence of eight delayed and two immediate prohibitions placed on 11 vehicles and trailers earlier this year during two inspections. The faults largely concerned brake damage and engine oil leaks which, in defence, it was later submitted were the subject of an engine design fault which was now being corrected. Mr Atkinson said the facilities at BRS's Dunstable depot, where all maintenance was now being carried out, were adequate but he expressed doubts about the skill of the mechanics based on the fact that although maintenance at the time of the GV9s was being carried out by Swann the faults were corrected at Dunstable and on two occasions the vehicles had to be submitted for clearance twice. Defects resulting from previous maintenance should have been spotted said Mr Atkinson_ Evidence was then given for the company by Mr R. Vachon, southern area manager, Mr J. Rundell, fleet engineer, Mr A. C. Potter, a director and Mr J. Vale, service manager of Swann. The evidence confirmed what had already been submitted by Mr Keene. In addition, Mr Vachon said that BRS could carry out the maintenance easily because vehicles previously being maintained at Dunstable had been transferred and their place had been taken over by Cartransport units.
The LA, Mr D. I. R. Muir, in his decision, said he thought the company had been too intent on securing a contract requiring more vehicles very rapidly without making sure maintenance facilities would then be adequate. He decided, however, to impose no penalty under Section 69 but to restrict the additional application to the six vehicles and 'trailers on the interim licence. Any more vehicles required would not be considered for three months and until an inspection had been carried out.