1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182 
Bed firm warned for sleeping on the job
Page 32
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
FAILURE TO CARRY out regular safety inspections on its fleet has led to a company receiving a warning at a Leeds disciplinary inquiry.
Sheffield-based Sleepvendor Beds had been called before North-Eastern Traffic Commissioner Tom Maeartney. Sleepvendor and two linked companies, Dorlux Beds and Sleepliner Beds, held restricted licences for a total of 24 vehicles and 38 trailers.
Vehicle examiner Peter Vardy said that in March and June 2006 two immediate Smarked prohibitions, indicating a serious lapse in maintenance, were issued to the company's vehicles. The stated inspection period was six weeks but the records showed intervals of up to 13 weeks. Appearing for the company, Paul Carless Junior said the maintenance contractor had been changed, driver training was being carried out, there were to be random audits of the drivers' daily walk-round checks, and roller brake tests were being carried during alternate safety inspections.
A CPC holder with 20 years' experience had been employed to oversee transport at all three companies, which would in future be based at the head office in Halifax. The intention was to apply for a single national licence to act as haulage contractors for bed companies.
Director DilPazir said the firm had advertised for a qualified transport manager last September because it was felt that one was necessary.
The TC said things had clearly gone wrong but the company had gone a long way towards putting things right and he had no information about any problems with the other two companies.