No-vehicle company has licence revoked
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A company which held an 0 licence authorizing two vehicles but had neither in possession was penalized under Section 69 of the Transport Act 1968 by Mr John Else, West Midland LA, in Birmingham last week when he revoked the licence after hearing a report by the DoE vehicle examiner in which it was stated that the company's maintenance facilities were unsatisfactory.
The examiner, Mr R. Davies, said that on a maintenance inspection carried out on June 12, 1970 it was found that the company, Barnetts (Burslem) Ltd, Stoke-on-Trent, had no maintenance facilities of its own but contracted work out to the Harris Motor Co Ltd, but had not entered into a written contract with the garage. Drivers were relied upon to report defects and the examiner was told at the time that the one vehicle the company was operating was maintained monthly and maintenance work recorded on inspection. The vehicle, a Commer van, was found to be in a poor condition and an immediate GV9 issued.
The director of the firm, Mr J. Ross, told the LA that since the inspection the vehicle had been disposed of and replaced with a smaller vehicle which did not require an 0 licence. He added, however, that the company would possibly obtain a larger vehicle in the near future and so would still require the 0 licence.
Mr Ross went on to say that a new system of maintenance had been introduced and an improved record system started. On reaching his decision, Mr Else said that as the company no longer operated any vehicles under the 0 licence he saw no reason not to revoke it.