Five prohibitions lead to suspension
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A North Wales skip-hire firm had one of its three vehicles suspended for a week when it appeared before North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Patrick Mulvenna. Vehicle examiner John Brown told the Trafford disciplinary inquiry that he had made a mainte
nance investigation following the issue of an immediate prohibition notice for
seven defects, all endorsed as
showing a signifcant mainte
nance failure to a vehicle belonging to Andrew and Elizabeth Hughes, trading as Wasteater, of Prestatyn.
He was told the prohibited vehicle was the only vehicle being operated. However, the following day two further vehicles were stopped in a roadside check, one of which was given an immediate prohibition.
Five prohibition notices had been issued to the firm's vehicles in the past two-and-a half years, said Brown. Advice given appeared to have had no effect. He felt he had been misled by Andrew Hughes when he had said only one vehicle was operated. The vehicles had been in a dangerously unroadworthy condition.
After Brown had said only two inspection reports had been available for one vehicle, Owain Rees Williams, for the firm, said the examiner had only asked for a sample. Other records were available if they had been asked for.
Traffic examiner Richard Mill said enquiries revealed the previous owner of two skip vehicles seen without 0licence discs had sold his business to Andrew Hughes in March 1997. When he telephoned the number shown on the skips the calls were diverted to the Hughes' home number.
Hughes had denied being the owner and operator of the vehicles and had refused to be interviewed.
Rees Williams produced a statement from the previous owner of the vehicles saying Hughes had said he wanted the skips, but the one vehicle he had purchased was for somebody else.
He said a Stephen Pemberton had purchased the other vehicle and Mark Bowles, who ran his own mini-skip business, had stated he was going to apply for a licence for that vehicle. Until then Hughes had agreed that it could be put on the Wasteater licence. He had also paid Hughes to take his telephone calls.
After Hughes had said he had no reason to mislead the examiners, Mulvenna said it was quite clear the examiners had not been given the necessary information and it would have been better if the explanations now being put forward had been put to the examiners at the time.
Suspending the vehicle, Mulvenna directed the Vehicle Inspectorate to carry out further checks in three months' time.