Inaccuracies in load summonses
Page 19
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
North London haulier Range Transport and driver James O'Dee were called before Redbridge Magistrates on charges of using a vehicle with an insecure load—but the case was dismissed because the summonses were so inaccurate that they could not be amended.
Jonathan Lawton, defending, said the charge alleged that the offence was contrary to Section 40A of the Rood Traffic Act. However, part of the wording was from Regulation 100(2) of the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations.
Seeking to amend the wording, Diane Barker, prosecuting, said the company and O'Dee could not hove been left in any doubt about the charges they were facing. Therefore there would be no injustice if the prosecution were allowed to amend the summonses.
The magistrates refused, the charges were dismissed and the defence costs were ordered to be met out of public funds.