Improvement not enough for additional vehicles
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Improvements in maintenance and facilities saved an operator from penalty under Section 69 last week but were not enough, in the opinion of the Yorkshire LA, to allow him to operate an additional three vehicles, applied for, to the two vehicles and two trailers already authorized.
The operator, Mr M. J. Patterson, of Gondall, Yorkshire, had been called following maintenance checks in October last year. Mr D. Lane, a DoE examiner. said that on the second of two visits an immediate GV9 had been issued on one vehicle. Although repair work was carried Out by a public garage there were no inspection records. A driver /mechanic was employed to carry out running repairs.
Mr Patterson submitted that since October a building had been erected and a fully qualified fitter employed, together with a proper inspection system. He added that the vehicle inspected had been hired with a view to purchase but was in poor condition and had not been used for 18 months. The LA, Maj-Gen Sir John Potter. restricted the application for additional vehicles to one truck only.