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 
More rows brewing over recovery contracts
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Dominic Perry
reakdown operators in Kent, issex and Lancashire are ?eking changes to policeanaged recovery contracts ter the return to a rota sysim in Gwent.
Gwent police reverted to a )ta system after a damning Jclitors report that described ie letting of its recovery con
tract as "flawed" and its management as 'seriously deficient" ( CM5-11 July ).
Now two new recovery groups—one representing operators in Kent and Sussex, the other in Lancashire—want greater flexibility for the recovery schemes in their own areas.
Andy Smith, a member of the Kent and Sussex Recovery Group (KSRG). says that although he appreciates the need for managed recovery contracts, the current situation is costing hauliers money: "It's like having a policeman stood outside your local supermarket telling you that you can't buy its own-brand loaf unless you want to be arrested. Instead you have to buy the loaf recom mended by them that costs three times as much."
The KSRG is attempting to negotiate with the Kent and Sussex police forces in a bid to modify their systems.
Smith adds: "We are only just off the motorway here and handle recovery and maintenance for some of our neighbours. But in the event they tipped one over two miles down the road on the motorway it's unlikely we'd be allowed to recover it."