Dent's Face New Charges
Page 37
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Operation of Unlicensed Vehicles Alleged
A"pennymoor, County Durham, on Tuesday, Dent's Transport (Spennymoor), Ltd., faced five charges of using motor vehicles for the carriage of goods without a proper carrier's licence and five of using the vehicles without the proper insurance.
Mr. B. Gomer Montgomery, prosecuting, said that two of the charges related to the use of a vehicle operating under temporary substitution licence on February 25. The vehicle, he said, was being used under a substitution licence at the same time as the one it was replacing was also being used to deliver goods.
Mr. Montgomery claimed the temporary licence was invalid and the substituted vehicle was being used without a carrier's licence and could not be property insured. The remaining eight charges related to the use of another vehicle—an articulated unit—in the first week of March, for which, it was alleged, no temporary substitution licence had been issued.
An application had been made to the Licensing Authority for a substitute licence, but the artic. required two licences—one for the tractive unit and one for the trailer. The application was for a substitute licence for a vehicle which was not articulated and required only one licence.
But, he said, the firm's records showed that the articulated vehicle was used on March 2, 4, 6 and 9 to carry goods when it was not properly licensed and not , insured.
Mr. T. H. Campbell Wardlaw, defending, produced the temporary substitution licence relating to the first vehicle and said that it showed the licence did. not expire until February 28, therefore the vehicle was under licence and insured when it was used on February 25.
"There is no case to answer on the insurance charges relating to the articulated lorry," he said. No evidence had been produced by the prosecution, the only evidence being an insurance certificate which did in fact cover the vehicle. Similarly, no evidence had been produced as to the use of the vehicle on March 2 and March 6. The only dates when it had been shown that the lorry had been used was on March 4 and March 9.
The hearing was adjourned.