AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Too much time on examination

14th July 1984, Page 15
14th July 1984
Page 15
Page 15, 14th July 1984 — Too much time on examination
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

A Department of Transport vehicle examiner spent an inordinate amount of time examining a vehicle that was obviously not in use at the time. Nevertheless the Secretary of State for Transport's inspector, D. W. Awdas, considered that the Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner, had been right to reduce the number of vehicles authorised under the operator licence. The operator was A. G. Relph of Tricolour Coaches of St Albans. His fleet was reduced from four to three vehicles.

Mr Relph had appealed against the Commissioners' decision. He felt it was taken because of evidence concerning two different prohibition notices. The notices had been issued by two different vehicle examiners and at different places at different times. This evidence, he said was unduly weighted against his more recent performance. He had not disputed the prohibitions at the time they were issued.

The inspector agreed that there were unusual circumstances in the case. However he said that the faults on one vehicle, which had five defects, were serious and had come less than a year after a maintence inspection with similar results. He felt that the fleet was not being maintained in a manner which would safeguard the public.

In accepting that unusual circumstances, concerning one other vehicle, this could have thrown the Commissioners' hearing off balance and agreeing that criticism, of Mr Relph in this case was extreme, the inspector still felt that prohibitions placed on the vehicle were appropriate.

The coach in question had been issued with a immediate prohibition in October 1983. This had not been cleared by April 1984. The inspector accepted that the vehicle had not been used and was not regarded as a spare. After the immediate pro hibition had been issued the vehicle had been moved illegally on the public highway twice. The inspector considered it bad practice for the vehicle examiner to examine the vehicle without giving, its owner, due notice and when it was obviously at a repairers yard.

He said he had the feeling that things were improving at Tricolour coaches but that it was correct for the commissioners to be harsh and to maintain safety standards rather than be lenient which could lead to the possibility of road accidents, The Secretary of State agreed with the inspector and dismissed the appeal.

Mr Ridley disagreed with the inspector that it was bad practice to inspect a vehicle, without giving its owner due notice. He said that spot checks without appointment, like roadside checks, were important means of ascertaining compliance with the law and ensuring that vehicles were properly maintained at all times.

Tags

Organisations: Department of Transport

comments powered by Disqus