roubled firm hit by ines for poor brakes
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A troubled Cheshire operator has added to its peaems with a .£1,735 3 for running a vehicle with 'ective brakes.
Frodsham-based Lentrol, ding as Axmore, was operatunder interim authority after 3earing before North istern Traffic Commissioner verley Bell in May and being en until the end of the year to we it could operate properly. Appearing before Wrexham igistrates it pleaded guilty to ng a vehicle with defective akes, a defective speed Dmand an unsealed tachoiph. It also pleaded guilty to 'en counts of using a vehicle en the speed limiter was not irking correctly.
Prosecuting for the Vehicle .pectorate, Peter Edwards id that in December a fourle tipper was stopped in a eck at Lay, near Wrexham. I examination revealed that ?, front axle's nearside brake is inoperative and that the eed limiter system had been mobilised with a plastic cable . The tachograph system was t sealed at the gearbox and ere was evidence that the defect was longstanding.
When asked what system the company had for checking the seals, director Martin Hale had replied: '1 can't comment. I don't know anything about the seal—I don't know where the seals are. I don't know what you mean by seals." Hale had also said that he did not know that the brakes were defective. Asked when the vehicle had last had a brake performance test, he had said: "On 8 August 2000 at the MoT."
Driver Clifford Hall, pleaded guilty to using the vehicle with a defective speed limiter and when the speed limiter was not working correctly; he was fined £150.