AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Skip firm warned, but no action is taken

28th January 2010
Page 23
Page 23, 28th January 2010 — Skip firm warned, but no action is taken
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?

A SKIP OPERATOR escaped action against its 0-licence after it gave undertakings that were linked to safety inspections; brake tests and annual vehicle tests Wetherby Skip Services, which held an 0-licence for 25 vehicles, had been called before the NorthEastern Traffic Commissioner, Tom Macartney, who issued a formal warning.

Vehicle examiner Andrew Williams said that during a maintenance investigation that was conducted last February, he found inspection records were not being satisfactorily completed.

Two vehicles were examined and one was given a delayed prohibition. There was an initial annual vehicle test pass rate of 48.2%, and a final pass rate of 61.1%. Two vehicles were given immediate prohibitions at annual test. Brake and suspension faults were found on 33 of the 85 vehicles presented for annual vehicle test.

Director Mark Kent revealed that the company had taken on board the advice offered by the vehicle examiner.

Drivers were now carrying out additional waLkaround checks. and intermediate checks were being done between inspections.

He felt the company had been changing brake pads and shoes too close to the annual test.

It was now having roller brake tests twice a year, including just before annual test. Kent was confident things would improve and was prepared to reduce the period between safety inspections from eight to six weeks, He undertook to send a fitter on a VOSA inspection course; that safety inspections be not more than eight weeks apart; roller brake tests would be carried out twice a year, and there would be pre-vehicle test inspections.


comments powered by Disqus