AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Off-road vehicles after 40 convictions

26th September 1981
Page 7
Page 7, 26th September 1981 — Off-road vehicles after 40 convictions
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?

Keywords : Business / Finance

E VEHICLES were suspended for one month from the licence I by L. & C. P. Harper (Hauliers) Ltd of East Cottingworth, which 'wises 21 vehicles and 33 trailers, when it appeared before the (shire Deputy Licensing Authority N. F. Moody at a York public iiry.

r Moody said that 11 convic s had been recorded against company and 29 against its ers.

ompany director Leonard per said one case involved 14 he convictions involving of;es concerning drivers with an hgv licence and the unauised use of a vehicle. He had :red pleas of not guilty and ild have appealed but money short.

he offences concerned his tear-old son who had been 'ing a shunt vehicle on pria premises. The Guide to 3rators' Licencing issued by Department of Transport ed he did not need an Once for the vehicle, but he ; still fined £20.

Ir Harper continued by saythat four of the other convicns related to exceeding Ikm in a day and that he had )n told by Dip that it did not isecute for that offence.

lealing with drivers' hours convictions, Mr Harper said ) of the drivers involved had )ri sacked and a third had left company. Following the ivictions, his son had taken )r. the checking of the records the company had now gone ?.r to tachographs. All the drivwere given letters explaining

the law in relation to hours and records.

Questioned by Mr Moody, Mr Harper said ten vehicles were presently in use. The drivers were not paid on the actual hours worked but according to a bonus scheme which was designed to encourage drivers to do as much work as possible within permitted hours.

Suspending the vehicles, Mr Moody said the company had a bad record and it must ensure that it complied with the law in future. It already had a warning letter, and it was not the Licensing Authority's policy to give a second warning.

Tags

Locations: York

comments powered by Disqus