AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tacho offences cost £650

9th December 1993
Page 17
Page 17, 9th December 1993 — Tacho offences cost £650
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?

' . Three drivers employed by Lancashire-based Rochdale Road Runners have been ordered to pay 2650 fines and costs for drivers hours offences.

The hearing of allegations that employer Julie Sinclair caused and permitted the drivers in committing these offences was adjourned by Rawten stall magistrates until 15 December.

Driver David Wilson, of College Bank, Rochdale, admitted one offence of exceeding the daily driving limit and one offence of exceeding 4.5 hours driving without the required amount of break.

Philip Lawrence, of Wardle, Rochdale, admitted four offences of Failing to hove sufficient daily rest and three of exceeding the daily driving limit.

Stephen Spark, of Bacup, admitted three offences of taking insufficient daily rest.

Prosecuting for the DOT, John Heaton said the offences came to light following a request from a traffic examiner for the production of tachograph charts for vehicles operated by Mrs Sinclair.

An analysis of the charts produced showed that Wilson had driven for 11 hours in a day and for six hours and 12 minutes without sufficient break. Lawrence had taken daily rest periods varying between seven hours 40 minutes and eights hours 34 minutes, and had driven for periods between 10 hours 15 minutes and 10 hours 30 minutes in a day. Spark had taken daily rest periods between six hours 55 minutes and eight hours 45 minutes.

Wilson was fined £100 on his first offence, with no separate penalty in relation to the second, and ordered to pay £75 costs.

Lawrence was fined £200 on his first offence with no separate penalty in relation to the remainder. He was ordered to pay £100 prosecution costs. Spark was fined 2100 in relation to his first offence, with no separate penalty in relation to the other Iwo. He was ordered to pay £75 costs.


comments powered by Disqus