Evidence by fitter saved the licence
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
BECAUSE a West Midlands operator's vehicle had been off the road since June 27 and because he had been impressed by the evidence of the fitter now employed by the company, the West Midlands Licensing Authority decided not to follow his original intention of revoking the licence completely.
B. McInerney Ltd of Washford Heath had been called to disciplinary proceedings before the LA at Birmingham last week. The company's licence had been suspended on June 27 when it failed to attend a public inquiry when the case was originally listed for hearing.
Vehicle examiner Alan Morris said he had visited the company on three occasions in the last 12 months and at no time had he been able to discuss the situation with a director of the company.
On the last occasion a fitter told him that he had 19 vehicles and items of plant of one sort or another to maintain and the problem appeared to be the fitter's workload.
B. McInerney, managing director, said plant repairs were contracted out and the fitter was not responsible for maintaining any of the private cars. He had dispensed with the services of the fitter employed at the time as he had found out that he was undertaking work for other people and not doing his job with the company properly.
On the three occasions the vehicle examiner had visited the company, he had been away working on a contract in North Yorkshire. He had left things to the fitter who had been paid a considerable sum of money.
L. Brown, the fitter now employed, said he was responsible for looking after the three lorries and three of the vans operated. The vehicle given the immediate prohibition during the fleet check had been under repair at the time. The vehicles were now subject to a preventive maintenance inspection every five weeks using Road Haulage Association's maintenance records.
Prematurely terminating the licence so that it expires in July 1980 instead of in October 1982, the LA, Arthur Crabtree, said it was a serious case and he had been inclined to revoke the licence.
However, he had been impressed with Mr Brown who seemed to know what it was all about and had put the situation right.
He accepted the company had not attended the last public inquiry due to a misunderstanding and the fact that its vehicles had been off the road since had been a punishment in itself.
He warned the company that if there was an unsatisfactory report in 1980 he would not renew the licence.