Совет графства Хайленд избежал публичного расследования по безопасности грузовиков во второй раз подряд

Highland Council escapes public inquiry into its HGV safety failings – for the second year running after Traffic Commissioner issued a scathing decision notice Highland Council has narrowly avoided a possible public inquiry into its HGV fleet safety record – for the second year in a row. The Traffic Commissioner has issued a scathing decision notice that effectively says after eight years of warnings the local authority must make improvements. The council has itself acknowledged that “non-compliance can ultimately result in the HGV fleet being taken off the road and/or a public inquiry”. Removal of the fleet from roads would mean bin lorries and gully cleaners being unable to operate, with a huge impact on locals. Traffic Commissioner Richard Turfitt said “hopefully” a hearing held in January meant that the need for ongoing improvements has struck home “at senior level”. It was attended by the council’s assistant chief executive – place, Malcolm McLeod, and chief officer for fleet, Paul Reid, among others. The Office of the Traffic Commissioner (OTC) raised concerns about prohibition notices banning certain vehicles from the road, failed MOTs and audit results. The council is licensed to run 264 HGVs across 45 operating centres with transport managers overseeing maintenance. Understaffing in this area was raised in 2018 and after several “periods of grace” to appoint additional transport managers, who oversee maintenance, the council failed to do so and received a warning. In January 2021 a vehicle travelling in Lochaber lost two wheels, but HGV safety failings continued with two vehicles given ‘S’ marked Prohibition Notices which reflects major defects that point to serious failings in “maintenance or daily walkaround inspection procedures”. An 'S' Prohibition Notice is issued by an authorised Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) vehicle examiner or a police officer. The first came in 2023 and led to a further investigation exposing inadequate maintenance facilities, safety critical defects, ineffective wheel security systems, and an unsatisfactory prohibition rate. The latter refers to how often an operator’s HGV roadside or test prohibition frequency rate exceeds national averages, indicating systemic problems. A preliminary hearing in October 2024 resulted in an official warning being issued instead of a public inquiry - on condition that a compliance audit was undertaken and completed by February 2025. Before that could be completed, in December 2024, a vehicle received another ‘S’ marked Prohibition Notice after it was “presented for test with a dangerous defect present which was easily detectable”. The examiner found that “a thorough walk round check” should have revealed the issue “as the vehicle was visibly leaning towards the broken spring”. The audit promised by February did not arrive until March and noted failings such as unladen brake tests, and no improvement in the prohibition rate. In what appears to be a sign the commissioner was losing patience at this point he noted that “it appears that, for some reason, a further audit was suggested.” Earlier he pointed out: “I recently had cause to comment on a developing practice in this traffic area, where instances of non-compliance are greeted with offers to undertake an audit at some point in the future.” In July 2025 another audit was completed which the council’s Andrew Hunter took issue with it, saying that “we have raised several concerns… regarding the audit’s recommendations.” The Commissioner added: "The audit identified a large number of concerns, some of which had been referred to in the operator’s previous ‘action plan’". Yet another audit arrived in July 2025, the council’s service lead Andrew Hunter taking issue with it and raising “several concerns” regarding its recommendations. Mr Turfitt said: “Yet again, the audit identified a large number of concerns, some of which had been referred to in the operator’s previous ‘action plan’.” He added: “The purpose of an audit is to confirm compliance. Operators and applicants should not labour under the impression that this is an opportunity to have a go and only then remedy any shortcomings thereafter.” He said he needed to determine if a Public Inquiry into the council and those associated was needed, but eventually ruled that “enough progress was made." He accepted that an additional audit in December last year “pointed to considerable progress to now address the issues identified in the previous audits” and added: “I noted the efforts made under the leadership of Mr Reid, since his appointment in May 2025”. Yesterday’s communities and place committee where chairman Graham Mackenzie praised staff for “recovering the situation” from a potential public inquiry by making “massive strides”.