Blitz on plating and testing offenders
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of this week MoT traffic examiners carried out a nation-wide campaign to familiarize drivers and owners of commercial vehicles with the requirements of the Goods Vehicle (Plating and Testing) Regulations 1968.
Leaflets were handed to lorry drivers, point• ing out that all pre-1961 vehicles subject to the scheme (pre-1958 in Scotland) should have plating and test certificates and that between now and the end of March 1970 all 1961-67 vehicles (1958-67 in Scotland) will have to be plated and tested according to month of registration for motor vehicles or year of manufacture for trailers.
Until now, warnings have been given to operators who failed to have their vehicles plated and tested and only those who wilfully ignored the warnings have faced the possibility of prosecution. Now offenders will be reported to Licensing Authorities with a view to prosecution.
The first such prosecution in the country was brought at Camborne magistrates' court, Cornwall, on March 4 against Mr. Ian Arthur Lanyon, a furniture remover of Camborne.
Mr. Lanyon pleaded guilty to having contravened Sections 14(1) and (2) of the Road Safety Act 1967. Section 14 (1) calls for certain vehicles to display a plating certificate and Section 14 (2) for a test certificate. He was fined a total of £15 on these two summonses and was fined a further £3 and ordered to pay £3 costs for failing to keep records (Section 186 of the Road Traffic Act 1960).
In the North the first prosecution has already taken place and many more are in the pipeline. On March 31 the Yorkshire traffic area successfully brought charges against David Burt Coulson of Malin Bridge, Sheffield, a dismantling company, for using a vehicle contrary to Section 14 (1) and Section 14 (2). Fines of 15 on each count were imposed at Sheffield magistrates' court. There are two further prosecutions following shortly.
At Barking magistrates' court last Wednesday D. R. Rowe (Hauliers) Ltd., of London SE) 6, was fined £10 and ordered to pay costs of £2 for contravention of Section 14 (1). It was fined a further £10 and ordered to pay costs of two guineas for not complying with Section 14 (2) and £10 and costs of £2 for failing to keep records (Section 186 of the Road Traffic Act 1960).