'Good nick' warning
Page 14
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AN 0-licence renewal application was adjourned for six months by the Metropolitan Licensing Authority, A. S. Robertson, when inquiries under 569 of the Transport Act 1968 were also made. L. E. Spencer, of North Kensington, said the vehicle he hired from United Retaining Services Ltd was six or seven years old. He had operated this vehicle for six months and accepted that as 0-licence holder, he was responsible for its maintenance.
The vehicle had been put into the Hounslow garage of a subsidiary company of URS a few days before it was due to be examined at a test station, and he was upset when several defects were found and an immediate GV9 was issued.
Mr Spencer told the LA he had had £10 a week deducted from vehicle earnings as a charge for vehicle maintenance, but when vehicle earnings sagged, the vehicle owners had accepted a 0-a-week sum for maintenance work.
The LA, adjourning the renewal application for six months, told Mr Spencer that his vehicle examiners would be reporting on the maintenance provision made in future months. If the vehicle was not kept "in good nick" it was possible the renewal would be refused.