Q / am involved in an incident where a vehicle which
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I hired out was found to be defective in that it
had a tyre with insufficient tread and, at the time of the inspection, was overloaded. I understand that I may be charged with "'permitting the use of a defective vehicle" and with "'permitting overloading". The vehicle is on permanent contract work and returns to my depot only once every three months. Can I be convicted with "permitting" in these circumstances.
AIn the circumstances you outline, it is unlikely that you will be convicted of the offence because you have had the vehicle out on a long term basis. But you would be required to prove to the court that you had made adequate provision to have the vehicle inspected and serviced at regular intervals and' to a schedule compatible with its weekly or monthly mileage.
It is worth noting that cases of "causing use" of defective vehicles can be brought to court. But because you hire a vehicle to a customer, this does not mean, in law, that you necessarily "cause" him to use it; if however, you do not make provisions to maintain it, than you -permit" him to use it.
On the question of overloading, there have been cases where operators' vehicles have been loaded under the supervision of the • customer who was responsible for issuing weight tickets. We know that, in at least one case, even after appeal the customer was found not guilty of "using overloaded vehicles" but of "causing" them to be used.
A "using" charge can only be brought when there is an employer/employee relationship and, therefore, "permitting" charges are frequently brought against the owner when someone -other than the owner or his servant" is driving the vehicle. To support a "permitting" charge there must be knowledge of the circumstances on part of the defendant.