Defence arguments thrown out
Page 14
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A driver and his employer were fined E650 for drivers' hours and tachograph offences after Abergavenny magistrates rejected defence arguments that they had no jurisdiction to hear the case.
Stuart Barratt had denied eight drivers' hours offences and one of failing to hand in tachograph charts after 21 days. He was fined a total of ,450. His employer, Graham Barratt of Ileywood, had denied failing to
ensure the charts were handed in: he was fined £200.
A second driver employed by Barratt, Simon Longdon, pleaded guilty to two hours offences and was fined i.150.
The magistrates heard that Longdon's vehicle had been stopped by the police and his offences had been apparent on the face of the tachograph charts which he produced to the police officer.
Also in the cab were a number of tachograph charts belonging to Stuart Barratt, and when examined these revealed a number of offences.
Arguing that the court had no jurisdiction to deal with Barratts' cases, Susan Williams for the defence pointed out that the summonses alleged that the offences were committed in Abergavenny when in fact they had been committed in England, not Wales.
She maintained that the prosecution should have been brought either in the area where the offences were committed or where the firm was based. maintenance, and that appeared to have been what the brothers had been doing.
Adjourning the proceedings for a week, Mervyn Pugh said that he wanted to see a proper maintenance contract for inspections every two weeks and copies of the MoT certificates.