AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A warning for fitters

29th December 1972
Page 7
Page 7, 29th December 1972 — A warning for fitters
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?

on motorways /1317:ch=ows

• A warning to tyre fitters about the risk of prosecution for obstruction when attending motorway breakdowns, unless proper procedures are followed, is contained in a report of an incident which resulted in a fitter being fined £25 and having his licence endorsed.

The report, by Mr H. P. D. Goodey, managing director of Rushtyres Ltd, Rushden, Northants, appears in the current edition of TAB, the official journal of the National Tyre Distributors' Association.

Mr Goodey's report tells how his fitters were called to a loaded articulated vehicle parked on the hard shoulder of M1 with burst twin tyres on the offside of the driving axle. It was 8 pm, dark and the artic driver was not then present so they parked their awn vehicle in front of the artic with its amber roof light flashing. They also, says vIr Goodey, coned off a portion of the slow lane and started work.

They soon became worried by the .3loseness of passing vehicles and when one ar two of the cones had been bowled over :hey stopped work and one man went to -ing the police control room to ask for Jolice supervision.

While he was away, a police patrol stopped and asked the other fitter to move his service truck on to the hard shoulder and remove the cones. This was done, but when :he other fitter returned from telephoning, he police patrol gave a statutory warning of possible offence having been committed.

The patrolmen were unable to comply with the fitters' request to remain and ;antral the traffic, but they radioed for a notorway maintenance squad to attend and supervise the laying of markers. When the maintenance team arrived and set out red lamps, the fitters found these too close to provide working 'space and, since they had already been warned of a possible summons for obstruction, they declined to move them themselves. They accordingly stopped work and returned to base.

The driver of the Rushtyres service vehicle was subsequently served with two summonses. The first alleged that he caused a vehicle to remain at rest on a road in such a position as to be likely to cause danger to other road users, contrary to Section 16 of the Road Traffic Act 1960. The second alleged that he caused it to stop or remain on the carriageway of a motorway in an unauthorized manner, contrary to the Motorway Traffic Regulations.

Magistrates found the offences proved, the driver Was fined £25 and his licence twice endorsed.

When Mr Goodey consulted Northampton police headquarters he was told that where attendance at a motorway breakdown meant that a carriagway might be obstructed, the correct practice was to ring the police control and ask for police supervision before starting work. Either a police patrol car or a motorway maintenance vehicle would be sent. Tyre fitters attending a breakdown had no powers to obstruct the motorway.

Mr Goodey believes the police are tightening up on all potentially unsafe circumstances on motorways and he has asked that the lessons of this incident be brought to the attention of all those involved in this type of work.

Tags

Organisations: Northampton police
People: P. D. Goodey

comments powered by Disqus