AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

£3,400 for wrong VED on recovery vehicle

6th July 1995, Page 19
6th July 1995
Page 19
Page 19, 6th July 1995 — £3,400 for wrong VED on recovery vehicle
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?

• Transtrack (Warrington) was ordered to pay fines, costs and back duty of £3,401.25 after it failed to appear before the Macclesfield Magistrates to answer charges of using a vehicle with the wrong rate of vehicle excise duty The company, of Stanley Road, Bootle, had said that it would plead not guilty because the vehicle concerned was a recovery vehicle.

Prosecuting for the Department of Transport, John Heaton said that last August a 38-tonne Volvo artic was stopped in a roadside check at Rostherne, Cheshire while carrying a digging machine and a dump truck. The vehicle excise licence dis

played had expired in July and was at the recovery duty rate of £85 for 12 months instead of the correct rate of £3,100.

The driver told traffic examiners that while the vehicle was sometimes used for recovery purposes it was frequently used for general haulage. Transtrack's customer, MJ Holten, had said that the load being carried was not a disabled vehicle but working plant being moved between sites.

The magistrates fined the company £3,000 with 1150 costs and back duty of £251.25.

The magistrates also issued a warrant for the arrest of director Christopher Williams, who is accused of making a false declaration to obtain tax at the recovery vehicle rate.


comments powered by Disqus