AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Haulier loses LPG kit case

17th October 2002
Page 24
Page 24, 17th October 2002 — Haulier loses LPG kit case
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 by Robin hleczes

A County Court judge has ruled that a firm must pay for an LPG conversion on one of its vehicles—even though the conversion was strongly criticised in an independent report and the judge agreed that the installer had not provided the skill and care expected of an LPG specialist.

Rex Newport is MD of import/export firm NPS of Barmouth, North Wales, which runs two CVs. Last year he had a Mercedes 560SEL car converted by Rossendale-based Nigel Kenny, trading as Rossendale Autogas Services.

After an initial inspection and test drive. Newport handed over a cheque for the work. But a more thorough inspection subsequently revealed a number of problems, including insecure installation of the LPG tank; a vent outlet too close to the exhaust system; gas pipes not properly secured to the vehicle: and lack of a gaiter in the boot to prevent fuel fumes entering the passenger compartment.

Newport stopped his cheque the day after delivery and commissioned an independent report on the vehicle by David Rolt of Milton Keynes based consultancy Colt Services. Raft criticised several aspects of the work and warned that the Mercedes should not be used until the faults were rectified. The vehicle has since had its entire LPG installation replaced.

Despite this, Kenny has won his case against Newport for non-payment. In a 22-page written judgment following a hearing at Aberystwyth County Court, Judge Godwin ruled that Kenny was entitled to the £1,356 he originally charged. Godwin pointed out that while some elements of the installation were contrary to the LPG Association's Code of Practice (COP 11), this code was merely a set of guidelines.

Although the judge accepted that some of the practices Kenny had employed "did not provide the skill and care to be expected of an LPG installer", he said that "the work he did substantially provided what was required of him".

Newport is now considering his options for further legal action based on the Construction 84Use Regulations.

"I'm not happy," he says. "I don't think the judge took enough notice of the report from Colt Services. With court costs it's now cost me about 15,000, including £1,800 or so for the second LPG kit to be installed. We're gathering more information and when we have it I'll probably be taking legal advice."

Nigel Kenny was unavailable for comment but Tom Fidell, director-general of the LPG Association (LPGA), says problems of this kind are widespread with non-LPGA approved installers and there is quite a high failure rate in spot checks.

Vehicle users, he says, should always seek an LPGAapproved installer and if they are concerned about an installation by a non-LPGA firm they should initially approach Trading Standards which may launch a prosecution.

However, he warns users not to replace the LPG system as Newport has done if they want to see the installer prosecuted: it must be an unmodified vehicle. Once you modify it you no longer have a case."


comments powered by Disqus