AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Warning after 'ingenious' theft

6th October 1967, Page 43
6th October 1967
Page 43
Page 43, 6th October 1967 — Warning after 'ingenious' theft
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?

"AN INGENIOUS" method of manipulating a conductor's ticket-issuing machine was disclosed to Bradford City magistrates last week, when Mohammed Munir Ahmed, of Church Street, Bradford, was fined a total of £150 for stealing £6 and falsifying a waybill with intent to defraud Bradford Corporation transport department. He asked for the theft of a further £74 to be taken into consideration and was given seven days to pay (or six months' jail).

Mr. John Ashton (prosecuting) said Bradford transport department statistics showed that Ahmed was handing in less money than other conductors on similar duties. He was using a roll-type ticket-issuing machine.

A check on tickets bought from Ahmed showed higher numbers than indicated on his machine when he returned to the depot. Tests showed the machine had been interfered with.

Ahmed admitted later it was the idea of a friend with whom he had shared the proceeds. He had falsified the waybills; his friend had altered the machine.

Det. Sgt. Horn said an electric drill, a pulley, chucks and other equipment had been found at Ahmed's home. By use of the drill and one of the chucks, the ticket machine could be altered in a few minutes. Ahmed had been in Britain since 1962 and had been earning about £20 a week.

When 'arrested Ahmed had £71 and his bank book showed deposits totalling £130 in the previous three weeks.