Trucks no longer operated pose problem for LA
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The problem of how to impose a penalty on a company no longer operating vehicles from the base which gave rise for the disciplinary action came before the Eastern Area LA, Mr H. E. Robson, last week.
Counsel for Tarmac Roadstones Holdings Ltd argued that it would be unreasonable to impose a penalty on vehicles operating from other Eastern area depots when it was entirely the fault of the Fen Drayton, Cambs, depot that the company had been called under Section 69.
Mr Michael Burrell, counsel said that until October 1972 three vehicles had operated from Fen Drayton. They were withdrawn at that date and vehicles presently operating from there were licensed from the East Midlands area and controlled from there. It had yet to be decided by the company whether or not it would again use Fen Drayton as an operating centre.
If it did it would have either to use Commercial garages for maintenance or rely on its Corby, Northants, depot, as was the
temporary arrangement now, said Mr Burrell. The subject of the inquiry, two GV9s in August 1972, had caused his client to carefully examine its maintenance arrangements and dispense with having vehicles permanently based at Fen Drayton.
Mr Brian Little, a vehicle examiner, said he inspected one vehicle at Fen Drayton in August 1972 and issued a delayed GV9. He asked for a second vehicle to be made available to him the following day.
This vehicle, he said, was in an appalling state: "No brakes at all and with nine other defects." He placed an immediate GV9 on this vehicle. No records were available for either vehicle and he was told they were kept at the Corby depot.
Mr Robson said there was clear evidence of a failure by the company and a penalty would be exacted. He would suspend one vehicle for one month but he would need time to study the present position of the licence to see how this decision could be made effective.