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 
Disqualified duo loses appeal at Tribunal
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Transport Tribunal has upheld a decision disqualifying Corwen-based pair over maintenance issues.
THE REVOCATION of the 0-licence held by Corwen-based Anne and Edward Edwards, who were trading as AJ Edwards, and their disqualification from holding an 0-licence for six months by Welsh Deputy Traffic Commissioner (DTC) Simon Evans, has been upheld by the Transport Tribunal on appeal.
The DTC was told that during a maintenance investigation in October 2008, son-le inspection records were missing and others were incomplete.
Vehicles were not being inspected at the stated interval of six weeks, and the failure rate at annual vehicle test was 83.3%. S'-marked prohibitions were issued to a vehicle and trailer in October. In addition, an undertaking given at a previous public inquiry to have roller brake tests conducted four times a year had not been complied with.
Edward Edwards had been the driver of a vehicle with a front axle that had been overloaded by 30% in May 2006. The partnership had been convicted at Conwy Magistrates' Court in February 2006 of a number of offences, including not using a tacho when required; using a vehicle without insurance; failing to produce tacho records; and failing to notify the DVLA about a new keeper of a vehicle.
There were two further driver prohibition notices concerned with tachograph failures in November 2008 and January 2009.
Edward Edwards thought that the reasons for failure at annual vehicle test were trivial, and that CPC holder Anne Edwards admitted she did not take any part in the business (CM 7 May).
Making the orders, the DTC said he was not satisfied that real progress had been made since a previous public inquiry in 2005. Effectively, the same issues, which related directly to safety considerations, remained.
He was most concerned about the seriously dangerous condition of the tyres on both the vehicle and trailer that led to the •S'-marked prohibitions in October 2008, and he concluded that Edward Edwards was incompetent.
The shortcomings, mainly relating to vehicle maintenance, licence formalities
and management, the loading of vehicles and tacho compliance, and driver defect reporting provisions, were widespread (CM 21 May).
Dismissing the appeal, the Tribunal said this was a serious case that involved deceit by nominating a transport manager who failed to discharge the obligations of a transport manager at any stage. The partners had failed to abide by undertakings in relation to maintenance given at a previous public inquiry. They had also failed to heed the warning that was issued at the public inquiry in 2005.
It was a had case of maintenance failures and annual test failures, which could not be properly explained. The defects in the tyres. which attracted the prohibitions, were, in the Tribunal's collective experience, the worst examples they had seen.