AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

0-licence lost for safety procedure failings

9th October 2008, Page 27
9th October 2008
Page 27
Page 27, 9th October 2008 — 0-licence lost for safety procedure failings
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?

AN OPERATOR of 26 years claimed to be unaware of the requirement for daily vehicle checks when the 0-licences of his two associated companies were revoked.

In doing so, North Western Traffic Commissioner Beverley Bell ruled that a bid for a fresh licence by a new company would not be granted until there was a satisfactory audit report of its maintenance systems from the Road Haulage Association (RHA).

Middleton-based Edward Char

lesworth, trading as Charlesworth Timber and Direct Door Store, of which Charlesworth is a director, had been called to a public inquiry. Evidence from a vehicle examiner showed one delayed and two immediate prohibitions. There were insufficient safety inspection records, no driver defect reporting system and no forward planner.

Charlesworth said that Direct Door Store had been dissolved after trading and financial problems. The new company, Direct Doors Co UK. had purchased the premises and certain assets. It had continued to operate the Direct Door Store vehicles without acquiring its own 0-licence. The vehicles had not been used after he was told there was no authority for their op

eration. He was not a CPC holder and had no formal transport training, but intended to join the RHA.

Charlesworth said that despite holding a licence since 1982, he had not known about daily checks. No vehicles were being operated under the Charlesworth licence.

The TC said that Charlesworth had not done anything right. Direct Door Store had moved from its operating centre two years ago without notification. One vehicle had not had a safety inspection for 12 months. Another vehicle had been run without an MoT and had received an `S'-marked prohibition.

Michael Oliver, for Charlesworth, said that he would join the RHA and arrange for it to audit his procedures.

It rarely gets worse than this

The TC considered that it was as bad a case of failing to comply with the 0-licensing requirements that she had seen.


comments powered by Disqus