Final warning for four prohibitions
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A North Yorkshire company whose only vehicle had attracted four prohibition notices, was given a final warning at a Leeds disciplinary inquiry.
When Malton-based LH Sleightholme appeared before North Eastern Traffic Commissioner Keith Waterw-orth, he noted it had been warned twice about maintenance.
Vehicle examiner Peter Smith said he had imposed an immediate prohibition on the company's vehicle in September for a brake defect. Three of its four prohibitions had been for brake defects; the fourth was for an insecure wheel. There had been three refusals to clear prohibitions. The stated inspection periods had been exceeded and promises to have regular rollerbrake tests had been broken.
Smith had been told that maintenance had been left to the company's maintenance contractor since its transport manager left in March.
Managing director John Sleightholme said the company were engaged in structural steel building and electrical installation. It normally hired in haulage; the vehicle was used for emergency deliveries. He had made an error by putting his trust in one person. The firm had changed its maintenance contractor and had joined the Road Haulage Association, which would carry out an audit of its systems.
Lynn Stockdale, the new transport manager, said inspection periods had been cut from 12 to six weeks; every three months the inspections carried out by the contractor would be audited by a second contractor. The company now had a dedicated team of drivers who would receive training.
Waterworth warned that if there were any further problems action would be taken against the company's licence. It looked if the company had finally got a sensible system, he added—it was a pity that it had taken so long. He would ask the VI to carry out a further check within 12 months.