1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202 
Row over reefer diesel
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A REEFER OPERATOR is trying to prove he does not owe Customs & Excise almost £40000 in duty after setting up a system that drew Continental diesel from his trailers to power his trucks.
John Vincent,of Milford Havenbased Penfro Peche, is appealing against a decision by C&E that he contravened the Travellers' Relief Order and ADR regulations after officers seized his unit and trailer in September 2001 ( CM 26 June 2003).
His solicitors believe this type of case has not been tested before and could set a precedent.
Vincent told the tribunal he sought advice from Scania, trailer manufacturer Gray & Adams and the Freight Transport Association, about the maximum tank capacity he could fit to his refrigerated trailers. He was told 1,500 litres was the maximum. A 700-litre tank was later fitted and a "fuel sharing system" designed, so white diesel from the trailer could be used to power the tractor as well as the refrigeration system. He said Customs officers regularly checked his vehicles and had never told him the maximum tank size in ADR regs is 500 litres.
"I wasn't aware of the 5(X) litres limit until it was mentioned by the Commissioners," Vincent said.
C&E also claims Vincent owes it thousands in unpaid duty.
For Vincent, Nicola Shaw said the dispute was the meaning of "standard tanks": "The appellant is frustrated that having operated the vehicles they assumed it tube an accepted practice. It is irritating to say the least that the appellant is now staring down the barrel of a 07,000 assessment."