AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Econofreight no evidence

5th May 1988, Page 39
5th May 1988
Page 39
Page 39, 5th May 1988 — Econofreight no evidence
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 : Magistrate, Law / Crime

• Heavy haulier Econofreight United Transport was before Wakefield magistrates last week to answer the charge that driver Gordon Graham had refused a police officer's instructions to proceed to a weighbridge to be checked — only to find that the prosecution could offer no evidence.

Econofrieght admitted using a trailer without a plate securely attached in a conspicuous and readily-accessible position, but no evidence was offered against Graham or against both the company and Graham over committing similar offences in relation to a tractive unit.

Ian Bosley, prosecuting, said that on 17 September 1987 Graham had been driving an artic carrying an abnormal and indivisible load weighing approximately 92 tonnes. The trailer was required to display a manufacturer's plate showing certain details, but did not give that information.

Defending, Stephen Kirkbright said the load, which was moving from Cambridge to hnmingham, had passed through five police areas under police escort without comment. The plate concerned clearly showed the weights at which the trailer could operate. He admitted that it did not show the British Construction & Use weights but, although required by law, those weights would never be used as the trailer only ever carried abnormal and indivisible loads under the Special Types provisions.

The magistrates fined Econofreight 250, and ordered the company to pay 212 towards the costs of the prosecution. They directed that Graham's defence costs be paid out of public funds.


comments powered by Disqus