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
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194 
Hire firm escapes with warning because of new truck and maintenance contract
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TWO SETS of poor maintenance records and a bad record at annual test earned a hire company a warning at a Bristol disciplinary inquiry. The firm escaped more serious action because it had invested in new equipment and a new maintenance contract. However, warning Thame-based Helpful Hirings about its maintenance standards, Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Fiona Richards said that a very serious view would be taken of any further failings The company, which holds a restricted licence for four vehicles, had been called before the DTC at a Bristol disciplinary inquiry following unsatisfactory maintenance reports in 2004 and 2005.
Vehicle examiner Ben Matthews said that there had been no prohibitions, but the annual test pass rate was well below the national average. He found the maintenance records lacking. Some showed the same fault repeated from one inspection to the next;others showed faults had been identified but were not shown as having been rectified. Inspection intervals should be every eight weeks but ranged up to 17 weeks.
After the 2(X)4 report assurances had been requested from the company, which had said a new member of staff was being appointed with specific responsibility for the fleet. However, Matthews had been told that the person concerned only occasionally visited the operating centre. The company had also promised that its computer would be set up to highlight the inspection periods, and that brake tests would be conducted in line with recommendations.
Matthewssaid he could not sayvvhat the 2004recommendation for brake testing had been as that inspection had been conducted by a different examiner. Nor could he confirm that there was only one 17-week interval between inspections,when a vehicle had been off the road.
Director John Gladwin said the test pass rate was only really had for one vehicle, which brought the average down. It had been replaced by a brand new vehicle. All four vehicles were now on a maintenance contract with Barnes Daf which ,unlike the previous contractor, had full workshop facilities.
Butterfield asked the TC to give the company credit for its investment in staff, the new vehicle, and the new maintenance contract.