AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Haulier to appeal against £25 fine

19th November 1971
Page 31
Page 31, 19th November 1971 — Haulier to appeal against £25 fine
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Redpath Bros Ltd, Wooler, Northumberland, is to appeal against conviction by Berwick upon Tweed magistrates last week, on summonses brought by the Northern LA alleging causing or permitting the brakes, steering gear and horn of one of the company's vehicles to be defective.

The company pleaded not guilty and a vehicle examiner said in evidence that on January 5 this year he stopped a rigid vehicle belonging to the company when en route between Berwick and Woofer. Inspection showed there was excessive play in the steering gear, brake fluid was leaking and affecting brake efficiency and the horn was not working.

Cross-examined by Mr T. H. Campbell Wardlaw, defending, the examiner, Mr J. Calvert, said he was not aware that the vehicle was cleared by a colleague although the steering gear had not been touched.

Mr Campbell Wardlaw pointed out that the Testers' Manual issued by the DoE stated there had to be some play on movable parts otherwise they would not work.

It was contended that in this case the play was not excessive and this was borne out when a second examiner passed the vehicle. The defendant did not dispute the brake and horn defects but evidence would be called to prove the company not guilty of causing or permitting the offences.

Mr John Frizzle, driver of the vehicle, said on January 4 he received instructions to collect sheep locally for delivery in Wooler and, as he had more sheep to collect the following day, he left the vehicle outside his home at Berwick that night. On January 5 it would not start and a local garage had to get it going; on the return journey he was stopped by the examiner.

Replying to Mr Campbell Wardlaw, Mr Frizzle agreed the foreman/mechanic had refused permission for the vehicle to be taken to Berwick but said the traffic clerk had given him authority to do so. As a result he had been sacked.

Evidence was given by the foreman, Mr M. Hardy, that he had refused permission because there were defects needing attention.

Mr J. Redpath, managing director, said no one but he and the foreman could give authority for a vehicle to be taken out. The traffic clerk had also ceased to work for the company.

Mr Campbell Wardlaw submitted that on the evidence the company could not be adjudged guilty of causing or permitting the offences.

The magistrates ruled that the case had been proved and fined Redpath Bros a total of £25, £10 on each of the summonses concerning brakes and steering gear, and £5 for a defective horn.

Mr Campbell Wardlaw said after the hearing that there would be an appeal to Quarter Sessions.


comments powered by Disqus