AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Suspension for defective brakes

29th May 1997, Page 19
29th May 1997
Page 19
Page 19, 29th May 1997 — Suspension for defective brakes
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 : Mcnulty, Railway Brake

• A Stockport haulier who collected two prohibition notices for defective brakes in his first 14 months of operation had his licence suspended for a month.

Patrick McNulty, trading as McNulty Haulage, of Reddish, Stockport, had been called before North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Jack Levin because of concern over his maintenance record.

DOT vehicle examiner Simon McCalla said that McNulty's truck was given an immediate prohibition in February for 11 defects, mainly relating to brakes, after it was stopped in a mobile check carried out in conjunction with the police.

t

tot

The brakes were in a very poor con dition, said McCalla, and a prosecution was pending. In addition, there were three defective tyres and a fractured wheel stud.

A delayed prohibition for defective brakes had also been imposed on the vehicle in June 1996, only two days after a routine inspection. In reply to the Deputy TC, McCalla said that the brake defects found in February appeared to be of long standing.

McNulty said that the lorry went on to some rough sites and the driver had not been filling in his defect book. Though he held a licence for three vehicles he was operating only the one.

Asked what he did to test the brakes, McNulty said that he just jacked the lorry up and adjusted them.

Levin said that the vehicle had been in a very, very dangerous condition and he could not trust McNulty to maintain the vehicle himself. He required to see a maintenance contract with a reputable commercial garage before McNulty's licence was returned.


comments powered by Disqus