Home > Haulage > Hatfield Based Plant and Aggregate Supplier Has Failed in its Bid to Operate Extra Heavy Goods Vehicles

Hatfield Based Plant and Aggregate Supplier Has Failed in its Bid to Operate Extra Heavy Goods Vehicles

Hatfield Based Plant and Aggregate Supplier Has Failed in its Bid to Operate Extra Heavy Goods Vehicles

It has been revealed that a Hatfield based plant and aggregate supplier has failed in its bid for the ability to operate extra heavy goods vehicles due to an industry regulator finding that there was an insufficient level of management for compliance.

The Traffic Commissioner for the East of England, Richard Turfitt, has also concluded that the plant and aggregate supplier was ‘too slow’ to put in place any changes following a number of safety issues that were reported by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency. The business, Peter Brothers Ltd was found with a number of shortcomings in their vehicle operations. These shortcomings included safety inspections that were meant to be carried out on a regular basis were not carried out in time, works that need to take place in order to rectify defects that were identified by drivers and nor recorded. Other issues found by the DVSA were a poor pass rate for the vehicle MOTs, an operator being issued with a fixed penalty of £100 for an insecure load, an operator that was convicted and fined £800 for the use of a vehicle that took place in excess of its authorisation, and another vehicle that was given a safety critical prohibition notice for having an excessively worn steering relay and arm pivot.

These problems mean that the business had its licence curtailed from the 21st March at 23:59. This curtailment happened for one week, and a public inquiry too place on the 21st also. It was decided that the operator’s repute had been tarnished and while different operators might consider the intervention that occurred was too lenient, the Traffic Commissioner took into account the significant impact his refusal to grant an increase in authority would have on the business.

It was heard that even though some improvements were attempted by the company, the number of MOT test failures and some advisory matters still needed to be addressed. The business was also given a 2-month period in order to find a new transport manager.

Leave a Reply