AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Undertakings save licence

28th July 2005, Page 33
28th July 2005
Page 33
Page 33, 28th July 2005 — Undertakings save licence
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?

Two wheels lost on the motorway have led to a 16-week licence cut for a Scottish firm — and its transport manager must go on a course.

TEN MISSING wheelnuts that caused a truck to lose two wheels on a motorway were among the offences that led to a Scottish operator's authority being cut from five vehicles and seven trailers to three vehicles and five trailers for 16 weeks. The transport manager was ordered to go through refresher training.

When Rossden Transport of Denny appeared before Scottish Traffic Commissioner Joan Aitken at an Edinburgh disciplinary inquiry she heard of maintenance problems, including the wheel-loss incident and the lack of a driver defect reporting system.

Vehicle examiner Graeme Paterson said that on 3 February one of the company's vehicles lost both nearside wheels from its third axle on the M9. None of the 10 spigot wheelnuts were in place; they had come undone and been lost. There was elongation on both sets of wheel centres and wear was apparent on the outer wheel surface caused by the movement of all 10 wheelnut washers.

No defect reports

The wheels had been removed five days earlier. Paterson stressed that if the correct retorquing procedure been followed • the wheel nuts would not have come loose. No evidence of a driver defect reporting system could be produced. Neither the company's sole director, Anne Peters, nor its transport manager, Jack McAra, was aware of the correct retorquing procedure.

On 10 February a vehicle and trailer were both given immedi ate S-marked prohibitionsshowing a serious maintenance problem for brake defects and an insecure wing which was likely to come off. The defects were of long standing, he added, and should have been obvious from the vehicle's performance and handling.

The last safety inspection for that vehicle and trailer had been in September 2004, some 18 weeks before the issue of the prohibitions. He had been told that the vehicle and trailer were based in Fife, and while there were arrangements for running repairs there were none for safety inspections.

McAra said drivers were verbally instructed to check wheelnuts daily; there was a manufacturer's wheel brace in each cab. The purchase of a torque wrench, which he understood would cost 1600. would be considered.

When the contract for the vehicle and trailer working in Fife had started they had asked a garage to handle the maintenance but it had gone out of business. He accepted he had failed to ensure the vehicle and trailer were regularly inspected.

Contract with FTA

McAra told the TC that a written driver defect reporting system and a wheel retorq ui ng system were now in place,They had also entered a contract with the ETA to assist them.

Anne Peters told the TC that it had been left to the drivers to discuss any vehicle defects with McAra. She had assumed McAra had arranged safety inspections for the vehicle and trailer in Fife.That vehicle was based at the opencast site at Inverkeithing.

Appearing for the company, Michael Whiteford said it now ensured its vehicles and trailers were inspected every five weeks. All five vehicles specified were required for the business.

The TC said it was a matter of luck, and nothing more, that no one had been injured and no property had been damaged in the wheelloss incident. It was extremely fortunate the prohibitions had ben issued to the Fife vehicle and trailer before their defective state resulted in a serious incident.

In view of the steps taken she would allow the licence to continue on condition that she received written undertakings about retorquing procedures and refresher training for McAra. •

Tags

Organisations: ETA
Locations: Fife, Edinburgh