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
183
184
185
186 
Written warning is sufficient for operator willing to make changes
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
MAINTENANCE, PROBLEMS led to an operator appearing at its first public inquiry within a year of being awarded an 0-licence. Nelson, Lancs-based Miles Hodson, trading as Rivendale Block Paving, with a restricted licence for one vehicle, had been called before the DeputyTraffic Commissioner Mark flinchliffe at a Gol borne disciplinary inquiry.
Vehicle examiner Stephen Keisall said he had inspected the one vehicle in use during a maintenance investigation in November. issuing an S-marked immediate prohibition for a seized load-sensing valve.
The vehicle had had a safety inspection two days before his visit but there was an instance of the inspection period being extended to 14 weeks. No driver defect reporting or forward planning systems were in place.
In relation to the seized valve, Hodson said he had a letter from his maintenance contractor assuring him it would not happen again. He now hada defect reporting book and was using a calendar to plan inspections.
Hodson said he had been taking his wagon to his maintenance contractor in good faith and had spent £4,500 on maintenance this year. He had been involved in an accident in a wagon a few years ago when the cab came off and he wanted to avoid any similar situation. He felt his maintenance contractor had let him down.
After Hodson had agreed to reduce his inspection period to eight weeks, the DTC said that in his experience it was no more expensive than inspecting every 12 weeks as defects were picked up before they became more expensive to repair.
Hodson gave a number of undertakings including a promise to attend a new operator's seminar.
Taking no action apart from issuing a written warning, the DTC said the only significant prohibition related to a failure by the maintenance contractor to sort out the load sensing valve.