AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Fitter fined for part in brake fault

6th April 1995, Page 22
6th April 1995
Page 22
Page 22, 6th April 1995 — Fitter fined for part in brake fault
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?

• A fitter from a commercial garage has been fined £140 for aiding and abetting the use of a vehicle with defective brakes, after a lorry crashed through a wall.

Whitby Magistrates heard that last July a two-axled rigid ERF owned by Burton Roofing (Hull), and driven by Anthony Fountain, crashed while negotiating Sledgates Bank.

In a statement read to the court, police vehicle examiner PC Sandercock said that the rear nearside brake chamber had been removed from the vehicle. However, the remaining three brakes were in good and efficient working order and he did not consider that the absence of the fourth brake had any relevance to the accident, which he blamed on driver error, David Frankland, of Tockwith,

1 6

York, a fitter employed by HGV Services of Wetherby, said he had been called out to the vehicle after the driver had reported that the brakes were defective. The diaphragm on the rear nearside wheel had split and he was unable to replace it at the roadside. He considered that the remaining three brakes were efficient, sealed off the brake pipes to the fourth wheel and advised the driver to proceed with caution.

Defending, Jonathan Lawton said that Frankland was an experienced fitter, He had made the decision that the vehicle was safe with three brakes and that deci• sion was supported by the observations of the police vehicle examiner, The tachograph chart taken from the vehicle after the accident demonstrated not only that the driver had been exceeding the legal speed limit, but that on one occasion the vehicle had been braked almost to the point of locking the wheels before turning right. The vehicle had negotiated a number of severe gradients before the accident occurred: no blame could be attached to Frankland, whose decision had been a proper one given the circumstances.

Frankland was also ordered to pay £60 costs and had his driving licence endorsed with three penalty points.


comments powered by Disqus