AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

[nspection Blitzkrieg' resulted in :urtailment

5th February 1971
Page 63
Page 63, 5th February 1971 — [nspection Blitzkrieg' resulted in :urtailment
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?

One of the difficulties faced by Traffic ommissioners considering the revocation, ispension or curtailment of a rural coach lerator's psv licence is the knowledge that ly penalty imposed affects not only the Derator but also the public who depend on ie operator's services.

This was said in Birmingham last week ,T Mr John Else, chairman of the West

lidland Commissioners, when he removed ne from a fleet of 19 coaches operated by rimrose Motor Services, Leominster, by

irtailing the psv licence held by the .oprietor of the company, Mr G. D. mgry, under Section 127 of the Road raffle Act 1960, as extended by Section 35 the Transport Act 1968.

Earlier the court had heard that the firm's :hides had attracted 13 psv 102 defect )tices and one immediate psv 71 .ohibition notice in 1969 and 36 psv 102s, ree delayed psv 71s and 11 immediate psv s in 1970.

Giving evidence, Mr R. W. Cullen, a nior vehicle examiner, told the Nnmissioners that between September and ovember of last year a "blitzkrieg" of spection on the firm's maintenance eilities. had been made. "The result of the ipection," said Mr Cullen, "suggested that ry little maintenance had been carried out d certainly not on a regular basis."

Mr Bengry said in evidence that many of coaches--some of which were more an 15 years' old—were used on school ntract work and made very little profit.

though the coaches covered only 40 miles day they still required a great deal of aintenance.

Tags

Organisations: UN Court
Locations: Birmingham

comments powered by Disqus