AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Discharge for overloading

21st November 1991
Page 19
Page 19, 21st November 1991 — Discharge for overloading
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?

• G Stiller Transport and one of its drivers have been given absolute discharges on an overloading charge.

Penrith magistrates were told that the artic concerned had been supplied with its fifth wheel

in the wrung position. The court heard that the 38-tonne attic, which was carrying pipes, was being driven by Raymond Topping, when it was stopped in a check at the Harker dynamic weighbridge.

The permitted 6,160kg weight of the first axle was exceeded by 620kg (9.3%). It was conceded that neither the permitted drive axle nor gross weights had been exceeded.

Gary Hodgson, defending, said a subsequent investigation had revealed that the tractive unit, which had a fixed fifth wheel, had been supplied with the fifth wheel in the wrong position. The company had been unaware of this as the vehicle had not previously been stopped in a weight check.

The vehicle had been working on a specific contract and the pipes, which ran the full length of the platform, could not have been positioned in any other way.

He referred the court to an item in Commercial Motor confirming that the Department of Transport was changing its policy so that in future overloads of less than 10% would not be prosecuted. Hodgson said there would probably have been no prosecution if the vehicle concerned had been stopped in a weight check now.

Hodgson said Stiller issued specific instructions to its drivers about overloading, and the company had done all that a reasonable haulier could do to avoid such offences. He argued that the driver and company were both blameless.


comments powered by Disqus