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 
No know how on law
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A MANCHESTER haulier's licence was revoked by the North-western Licensing Authority Roy Hutchings -last week because of unsatisfactory maintenance arrangements and insufficient knowledge of the law regarding maintenance.
Mr Hutchings also refused A. A. Headen of Droylesden's application to renew the licence which authorised two vehicles.
Vehicle examiner Roy Barnes said there had been problems in arranging interviews with Mr Headen, and eventually the vehicle operated was found parked by the roadside in Openshaw.
He imposed an immediate probition for defective brakes and springs.
Mr Headen had stated it hac not been in regular use. There were no maintenance records and he was vague aboui licensing requirements and was unhappy about having to cam. ply with them. Mr Headen had s history of unsatisfactory reports and vehicle prohibitions.
Questioned by the LA, MI Headen replied that when rea pairs were needed they were carried out by a garage, The vehicle in question, a Ford 12. ton tipper, had been off the roac for several months and he claimed he had no intention ca using it until it had been put right.
After being told that specifiec vehicles must be in a satis. factory condition whether in use or not, Mr Headen said he was not going to throw money awe), if he was not using the vehicle.