AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Cleared on brake bult

30th June 1994, Page 18
30th June 1994
Page 18
Page 18, 30th June 1994 — Cleared on brake bult
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?

• Fareham, Hants magis trates cleared Wilfred Holden (Blackburn) of using a vehicle with defective brakes after being told the brakes were working properly despite a seized load-sensing valve.

The Darwen-based company denied using a partially laden artic when the service brake was not in good and efficient working order.

DOT vehicle examiner John Edwards said the vehicle was stopped in a multi-agency check on the M27 last December. When he examined it at a nearby test station, the load-sensing valve appeared to have seized.

Questioned by John Backhouse, defending, Edwards said the axle weighing device at the test station was not calibrated and had not been used to check the weight on the drive axle. Consequently, he did not know what position the valve should have been in for that load. The vehicle was tested on the rolling road and it passed that brake test in all respects.

The company's fleet engineer Keith McCrae said the company's vehicles were inspected every six weeks. The vehicle concerned was almost due an inspection and no defect had been reported by the driver in the previous six weeks.

Given that the trailer was only partially loaded, and the load was positioned at the front, the valve had seized in a position that gave the correct braking to all wheels, Load-sensing valves could get dust on the moving parts, and being aluminium, were liable to corrosion in the winter. It then possible for them to seize without warning, usually in the fully open position.

The magistrates directed that defence costs, which were said to be substantial, should be met out of public funds.


comments powered by Disqus