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
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182 
Warning for firm that 'lurched about not really knowing what it was doing'
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A NEW OPERATOR has escaped with a formal warning after giving a series of undertakings at a Leeds disciplinary inquiry. North-Eastern Traffic Commissioner Tom Macartney said the firm had given the impression of "lurching about not really knowing what they were doing".
Goole-based Simon Smales and Stephen Dixon, trading as S&S Installations, had been called before the Tc. because of concerns over vehicle maintenance.
Vehicle examiner Simon Lewis said a vehicle belonging to the firm was given animmediateS-marked prohibition, indicating a serious lapse in maintenance, for loose wheelnuts on three wheels, a defective direction indicator and a braking defect. When the vehicle was produced for clearance it was given a refusal to clear and variation notice for a number of brake defects.
The condition of a vehicle examined in May was generally satisfactory. However there was no evidence that a maintenance programme existed, no maintenance records were available, and Lewis was told the firm had problems with its maintenance contractor.
Smales said the firm was currently operating one vehicle. The nominated transport manager, his wife's grandfather, was not well.The maintenance contractor had been changed and inspections were carried out every six weeks.He admitted they had carried out their own inspections without any paperwork because of a dispute with their original maintenance contractor.
John Wright, the firm's proposed new transport manager, said the vehicle given the prohibition was "a load of junk" and that he had suggested they sell it. He was currently the transport manager on his wife's licence,driving her vehicle based at the same yard.