Taxi Driver Online

I have a dilema.
On Saturday night our council were carrying out inspections on hackney carriages with the help of the police.
The car I was driving was asked to attend for an inspection.
Now the workshop manager at the testing facility was present but as far as I am aware he is not part of the inspection team. My vehicle was inspected and there was an issue with corrosion on the rear off side disc. Now one policeman, who was in the car said that he had tried the brakes and they were fine. The one who was under the car wasn't sure and I heard him sugest that this corrosion was due to the brake caliper being inoperative. I was not permitted to look myself but the workshop manager who is also a mechanic looked and stated that the brakes were an MOT failure and the vehicle should therfore be issued with a PG9. The actual PG9 states "brake component corroded(rear disc) O/S caliper siezed. Failed."
I was permitted to take the vehicle to my garage with a police escort. The escort gave me a lift back. Whilst talking to the officer on the way back he told me that the officer carrying out the inspections was not a qualified mechanic.
Now I took the vehicle to another council approved garage without doing anything to it and showed him the PG9. He carried out a brake test on the vehicle and it passed. He carried out a visual inspection of the corrosion and said that it was not an MOT failure but an advisory and the caliper was in perfect working order.
Now the dilema, do I have a case against anyone and if so,who?

_________________
Grandad,

another dangerous unfit vehicle taken off our roads

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

a simple MOT rolling brake test will confirm if the caliper is ok

_________________
Of all the things ive lost, i miss my mind the most

Yes, this was done and the brakes passed.

_________________
Grandad,

I would suggest writing to the IPCC clearly there is a serious flaw in the way these inspections are carried out so if the inspection is not being carried out by a qualified MOT inspector are they also missing genuine faults ?

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

It's usually a Traffic Officer who carries out roadside inspections or a VOSA technical officer.

i had an issue with brakes on my Chrysler the other week on its compliance test. It was checked by my local garage 2 days before test, nothing wrong. compliance garage failed it on 41% brake imbalance of the front. WTF......

Went straight back to local garage, nothing wrong. Back to Folkestone for compliance, nothing wrong.... pass.

There is an appeal process shown on the pink PG9 document. However, as you've had the alleged defect rectified, you've negated your chance of an appeal. It has to be presented for inspection before clearance or any other work is done. Lucky for you the PG9 doesn't appear on your operators licence. In the PSV industry it does, and counts as a very black mark against your maintenance should yuou ever be hauled in front of the Traffic Commissioner!

Thanks Roy, Getting the PG9 lifted was the main priority. We needed the car back on the road urgently. My current argument is with the chap from the garage where the inspections were carried out. He was the chap that advised the police to give the vehicle a PG9 and he should not have even been involved. His remit, according to the council, was to open the doors and be there in case there was an equipment fault. Other than that he was to make the tea and organise the curry. those were the words of the council enforcement officer. She was not aware that he was getting involved with the inspections. Clearly he had a vested interest in vehicles failing and being given a PG9 because if the vehicle could not be moved, it would have to be left there for repairs.

_________________
Grandad,

He might have been a VOSA approved MOT tester which you don't need to be a mechanic to be one.

They have to justify the enforcement costs incurred during the inspections i.e. they have to find something else it wont happen again.

I would make a complaint and requesting confirmation that the chap who issued the notice was a qualified to do so, and then see what comes back.

_________________
IDFIMH

Council departments cannot do what they want... they think they can.. but they can't. for them to do anything they need to adopt a official procedure..ie... what is to be inspected.. by whom... for what reason..... what qualification the people will need..

you need to ask the licensing department for a copy of their procedure regarding Road side inspections.... and then go from there....

you also need to inform them that there was nothing wrong with your vehicle .... and if your vehicle is part of any statistics... then them statistics will be incorrect....

_________________
Justice for the 96. It has only taken 27 years...........repeat the same lies for 27 years and the truth sounds strange to people!

I have already been in contact with the licensing department. I have informed them that the brakes were tested at one of their approved garages and were found to be OK. I have asked them to remove the PG9 from any statistics that are being prepared. I have asked them to provide me with the qualifications of the inspector. I have also been informed this evening that another car from another company was given a PG9 for 2 defective tyres. These were checked by 2 other tyre companys and both were found to be legal. The owner of that company is also not a happy bunny. I think I may have to give him a ring in the morning.

_________________
Grandad,

I doubt you have any claim against the council (for loss of earnings or expenses) as we have to differentiate between qualified and authorised.

The mechanic may not have been qualified but as long as he was authorised to do the inspection then the councils covered. There is also a get-out where it is 'the opinion of the tester' that counts at the time of inspection, so one tester could issue a fail but another will think the component is ok.

There may be a case if the mechanic is qualified but not authorised, and most likely if he was neither qualified or authorised. You certainly have cause to complain about the procedure, but as for making a claim, unlikely, depending on whether or not the council followed its own prescribed procedure.

I had similar at pit time. Took car to mechanic for a pre-pit check, everything fine. Failed on roll bar bushes by pit mechanic. Went back to my mechanic who said there was nothing wrong with them, then went to Ford main dealer who also said there was nothing wrong. So back to pit station with results who said unless the bushes were changed it wouldn't pass inspection. Complained to licensing who said it didn't matter what other garages said as it was down to the opinion of the councils tester, even though I had a written report from both garages saying the bushes were fine.

The council have told me that the garage mechanic was not authorised to inspect the vehicles on Saturday night. They were not aware that he was inspecting the vehicles in any way. They thought that he was just taking the vehicles into the workshop for the police. I don't have a problem with the council on this, just the police officer taking advice from the un-orthorised mechanic.

_________________
Grandad,

If he was authorized by the council then Grandad has more of a claim, as they must have based their authorizing criteria on a flawed basis.

_________________
IDFIMH

Is it a case of Bung-u-Like? the garage getting more readies from the council or the vehicle owner for lifting/repairing PG9 defects? If so, then this needs looking at at the highest level.

Use the Freedom of information Act to find out.