'Slap-happy ways' more vehicles refused
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A Stilton (Hunts) operator who had been "jogging along in a slap-happy way over the years" was told by the Eastern LA, Mr H. E. Robson, at Peterborough last week, that he had come close to having his licence for four vehicles and three trailers revoked.
M. E. T. Henson of Stilton was called under Section 69 and was also applying for two vehicles and three trailers to be added under Section 64.
Referring to a series of visits to Henson's premises since 1970, vehicle examiner Mr George E. Spencer told the LA that in his view the premises were originally a muddy patch, They had been improved over the years and there was now plenty of hard standing. Mr Henson had not been able to keep the services of a mechanic and this, he said, had contributed to a number of GV9s being collected. On one visit all three vehicles examined had been given GV9s. On another occasion a vehicle presented for test had been found to have ten defects.
There had been an improvement in October 1972 but the situation had worsened again since then. He has been jogging along in a slap-happy way over the years, said Mr Spencer, and he could not recommend any increase in the size of the fleet. Mr Martin T. Henson said he agreed in general with Mr Spencer's general comments although he had always made every effort to improve matters and taken advice from Mr Spencer. His premises were very large, big enough for 12 vehicles, and his equipment was adequate. He had recently succeeded in employing a fulltime fitter.
Mr Henson said that only one GV9 had been given to a vehicle on the road; the others were given in his yard or at the testing station. He had no convictions. "I feel I tend to get GV9s because of my record where another operator might get a warning," he said.
Mr Henson added that getting the extra vehicles applied for would put him in a sound financial position and make his business viable. At present his overheads were out of proportion to his small fleet.
Saying that he had revocation in mind after Mr Spencer's evidence, the LA said instead he had decided to reduce the licence by one vehicle and refuse the application for extra vehicles. He pointed Out that Henson had already suffered a fleet reduction at a previous inquiry. This further reduction would give the operator time to prove that he could properly maintain a fleet, he said.