Forms multiplicity criticized
Page 23
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Mr J. Law, appearing for Wesco Services Ltd, at Glasgow last week, during a Section 69 hearing criticized the multiplicity of inspection forms in use and the lack of official guidance regarding what constituted "satisfactory" records. His clients had kept records but the sooner a common type of form was approved by the DoE the sooner the courts would escape these continual debates. He would have thought, he said, that this was something which might have been raised by the Department.
Wesco was operating 11 waste disposal vehicles out of 13 authorized. The company had a system of weekly, monthly and threemonthly inspection checks and admitted two immediate and two delayed GV9s. The vehicles were doing hard work and, it was submitted, damage could happen to them at any time. Mr S. Graham, a vehicle examiner, said that he examined seven vehicles at Wesco on March 10 and placed one immediate prohibition on a tanker. He examined records and found that these were being kept but were in an unsatisfactory form.
The Scottish LA, Mr A. B. Birnie, said that the important thing was how frequent and how thorough these inspections were, and obviously the vehicles were not being inspected frequently enough as the prohibitions had shown. He decided to curtail the licence to 11 vehicles and remove one of these for six weeks. He also said he wanted to keep in touch with the future plans of the firm and with its activities in Newcastle.