AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Poor dock roads blamed for GV9s

21st January 1972
Page 27
Page 27, 21st January 1972 — Poor dock roads blamed for GV9s
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• The Bristol company of Joseph Fish and Sons Ltd, with 28 vehicles and 52 trailers operating from Avonmouth and a further six vehicles and six trailers based at Southampton docks, had an application for four additional tractive units and trailers refused and its Southampton licence reduced by one vehicle when the company appeared before the South Eastern deputy LA this week. During this Section 69 hearing the poor road condition within the dock area was held partially to blame for GV9s issued against the vehicles, by the managing director Mr B. H. Fish.

Mr J. Saunders, a vehicle examiner, said that as a result of a variation application a fleet inspection was carried out on August 17 last year at the Southampton depot; all three of the vehicles examined at this time were issued with delayed GV9s. The main faults concerned brakes and steering but in addition on one vehicle a fuel pipe union was bound with pvc tape to prevent leaking while on another a battery cable was chafing a spring shackle.

Inspections, Mr Saunders understood, were carried out by Freightliners Ltd, although there appeared to be no written agreement, and he considered that the facilities provided were adequate although stretched to the limit. He also thought the five fitters and two semi-skilled men at the Avonmouth depot, where most of the repairs were carried out to the Southampton vehicles, were only just enough for the total fleet.

In his submission, Mr Fish said that this

• was the first occasion since he had become managing director 18 years ago that infringements of this nature had occurred. He pointed out that before being notified at the end of November last year that Section 69 was to he applied he had already taken steps to improve the maintenance situation.

Improvements had been made to facilities and a new fleet manager had been engaged to start work in February. For trunk work between Southampton and Bristol new vehicles were being used but until now older vehicles had been used for dock shunting and local container hauling. The company had drawn the Dock Board's attention to the poor state of the internal roads and Mr Fish blamed the roads to some extent for the GV9s. He was confident, however, that now, by using more robust vehicles and improved maintenance systems and procedures the trouble would not recur.

The deputy LA, Mr G. Mercer, said in his decision that he accepted that improvements had been made but nevertheless decided to curtail the licence. The company would be free to reapply for the additional vehicles required when a further fleet inspection would be carried out.

Tags

Organisations: Dock Board
Locations: Bristol, Southampton

comments powered by Disqus