1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160 
Haulier is labelled `too trusting'
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A Cumbrian haulier appearing at his third Public Inquiry in under three years has escaped disciplinary action for maintenance problems but has been warned not to be so trusting in the future.
Harry Stagg, trading as Barrow-inFurness-based H Stagg Plant Hire 84 Haulage, had been called before the North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Patrick Mulvenna at a Leeds disciplinary inquiry.
Stagg, who held a two-vehicle licence, appeared at previous Public Inquiries in June 2000 and December 2001. [11 Vehicle examiner Brian Hayhurst said that in October he examined one vehicle at the request of the police after it lost two rear wheels in Barrow. The axle hub reduc tion gear had disintegrated, but that did not appear to be maintenance-related.
Hayhurst imposed an immediate prohibition, endorsed as showing a significant maintenance failure.
A variation notice was issued for additional brake defects when the vehicle was produced for clearance.
Stagg told him that he had only purchased the vehicle in August and it was not put on the road until September. No firstuse inspection was carried out as the vehicle had only just passed its annual test when he had purchased it.
In the last five years, five inspections of Stagg's vehicles had resulted in four immediate prohibitions.
In reply to the DIG, Hayhurst said that Stagg had generally camphod with the undertakings given at the last Public Inquiry and there had been a steady improvement since the first Public Inquiry, lie felt that he had been unlucky.
Stagg said: 'I trusted the Mel that the wagon was okay. These are all teething problem when you buy a second-hand wagon. It has cost me a terrific amount of money; I have spent 12,500 on getting it something like decent."
Taking no action, the DEC said that Stagg should not trust people so much. The people who had sold him the vehicle were not before him answering for its condition.
Because the financial evidence was only sufficient for one vehicle, the OTC imposed a condition that there should be no more than one vehicle in possession at any one time.