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
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240 
Overloading: Northern LA calls for reports on weighbridges
Page 77
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
NORTHERN Licensing Authority Mr. J. A. T. Hanlon adjourned five Section 178 cases before him on Monday in Carlisle to obtain reports on the manufacturers' recommended carrying capacities, and the availabi
lity of public weighbridges in the area.
He thought there was insufficient evidence to enable him to give decisions.
West Cumberland Farmers Trading Society Ltd., Whitehaven, had been convicted and fined on December 22 1966 for overloading on the rear axle of 1 ton.
Mr. W. W. Chambers, its transport officer, told the LA that he knew of no farm in his area with weighbridges and that loads were always weighed on arrival and the miller's ticket was accepted as regards payment.
A second offence was in respect of a con
viction on October 28 1966 at Maryport for a I ton 2 cwt overload on the rear axle.
For the Society Mr. T. H. Campbell-Wardlaw told the LA that a further overloading offence was to be heard before the Sheffield Magistrates the following day relating to an alleged 2 ton 2 cwt excess on a rear axle.
Mr. Hanlon pointed out that the company had received 10 prohibitions last year. In reply Mr. Chambers said that in regard to a GV9 issued on February 13 the tanker concerned had been due for replacement last September but "due to the heavy demands that is being put on tanker manufacturers for containers, tank operators are being starved".
This case was adjourned as was that of Mr. H. Mitchell, of' Aspatria, who had been convicted and fined for a rear axle overload of 2 tons 8 cwt; Sewells Haulage Ltd., Egremont, convicted on three charges of overloading; and A. D. Wilkinson, Whitehaven, convicted on two such charges.
Robinsons Transport (Carlisle) Ltd. had been convicted of two overloading charges at both Cockermouth and Maryport with fines and costs totalling £78 15s. 6d, Mr. E. H. Robinson, director, said discrepancies had been found when double weighing and there was difficulty in finding weighbridges. Carlisle City weighbridge would only weigh axles on the submission of a certificate saying that the check was required for private purposes only.
A Ministry weighbridge had been constructed five miles south of Carlisle but was not operative, and Glasgow and Liverpool dock weighbridges refused to carry out axle weighing.
Dismissing with a warning a Section 178 case concerning British Road Services Ltd., Whitehaven, Mr. Hanlon said: "They should be treated no differently from small operators". But the evidence proved that steps had been taken to ensure that vehicles were correctly loaded before leaving customers' premises. ERS had been fined at Cockermouth and Maryport last year for overloading offences.