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
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 
Licence cut due to maintenance problems
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A TWO-YEAR history of maintenance problems,including poor defect reporting and record keeping, have resulted in the licence held by Accrington, Lancashire-based Triple C Waste & Reclamation being cut from three vehicles to two for 14 days.
The company was called before North-Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner Mark Hinchliffe.
Vehicle examiner Philip Harrison said that in October 2006, he issued two vehicles with immediate prohibitions for brake defects. A full set of inspection records was not available and the driver defect reporting system was ineffective. In August 2007, he issued a vehicle with an immediate prohibition for loose front-axle U-bolts and an oil leak. Some inspection records were not satisfactorily completed, a vehicle hired in for longer than a month had no 0-licence disc displayed and the driver defect reporting system was still a problem.
Director James Hemmingway said that when the company applied for an 0-licence there was no real guidance about what it needed to do. He felt there should be a system whereby it could pay for training from Vosa. Since the vehicle examiner's visit, everything was being done correctly, he added.
The vehicles were now inspected every four weeks by Cununings Commercials, the drivers had received training in daily walkround checks and the firm now employed a full-time fitter.
He gave a series of undertakings in relation to the company's maintenance arrangements.
The DTC felt that the case had gone beyond a mere formal warning.