FTA's engineer disputes claim
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A Freight Transport Association engineer has disputed claims by a vehicle examiner that an inspection pit was needed to properly inspect 38-tonne artics.
Bradford hauliers Alwyn Davison and Alwyn Davison Transport were before North Eastern Licensing Authority Frederick Whalley following a maintenance investigation.
Vehicle examiner David Howram said that he had received a complaint from a driver that he had been ordered to take out a defective vehicle.
Howram checked six vehicles and four trailers; four vehicles and one trailer were found to be defective.
There were eight consecutive inspection reports indicating a defective windscreen washer on the vehicle the driver had complained about. It also had a defective tyre and its offside mirror was secured with wire.
Howram said the workshop was a Nissen hut with a ramp alongside. It was very difficult
toic4 to inspect maximum capacity artics with closely spaced axles, without an inspection pit. The type of defect found showed the Davisons would benefit from the use of a pit.
Alwyn Davison Junior said that the company had not installed an inspection pit because it had been advised by the FTA that it did not need one. A new system of driver defect reporting had been introduced, with the drivers being given a check list and inspections were being carried out alternately by an outside contractor and the FTA.
FTA engineer David Fryer said that in his opinion a pit was not necessary for preventative maintenance inspections.
Whalley cut the Alwyn Davison licence by two vehicles and trailers, and the Alwyn Davison Transport licence by four vehicles and six trailers with both licences to expire in a month. He said it was for an LA to decide what facilities and arrangements were necessary.
If renewal was sought he would need to be satisfied about finance and maintenance.