7m artic charges found proved
Page 14
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
ARGES against Kaye Goodow and Co (Transport Con:ants) Ltd, Manchester, conning use of a 17-metre artiited vehicle outside the istruction and Use Regulais (CM May 30) were found ved by Carlisle magistrates the hearing was resumed : week.
he hearing had been adrned for the magistrates to sider the law after a de re that the load ; an abnormal indivisible and fell within a gap in regulations authorising its but notice was not aired.
.fter the magistrates had ?:n their ruling, Mr Jonathan don, defending, said that the offences concerning rloading were absolute both the company and its driver would change their pleas of guilty.
In mitigation, Mr Lawton said there were two separate points on behalf of the company. The vehicle in question was specifically designed both to carry the weight and to do the work it was doing. If the magistrates had decided to convict on the ground that notice of movement should have been served on the police the only difference between legal and illegal operation was the preparation of a piece of paper. There was no question of public safety involved.
Alternatively, the manufacturers of the pipes being carried had confirmed that owing to a miscalculation the weight had been misrepresented to the defendants, resulting in a gross overload of 13,158 kilos. If the weight, as given, had been correct the vehicle would not have been overloaded.
On behalf of the driver, Mr Lawton said he was carrying out his duties in an exemplary manner and there was no reason why he could have been concerned about the weight as the vehicle was specially designed for the carriage of this type of load.
The court fined Kaye Goodfellow and Co a total of £120, £60 for the gross overload and E15 on each of four charges of axle overloading, plus £22 costs. The driver was fined £5 on each of the four axle charges and £10 for the grass overload.