AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

"Noisy Concrete Drum: Prosecution Fails .

12th November 1954
Page 40
Page 40, 12th November 1954 — "Noisy Concrete Drum: Prosecution Fails .
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?

A PROSECUTION brought against I—k the operator of a vehicle with a revolving concrete drum, alleging that it caused excessive noise, failed before Dudley Bench last week. The case was said to be of great importance to the defendant, Sidney William Everitt, DodderhiII Court, Droitwich, because he had over 80 such appliances.

Police-sergeant B. J. Bradford said that he thought that the noise arose from the basic design of the vehicle. The crown wheel and pinion gear which rotated the drum was open and could not be completely oiled, Mr. I. C. Carless, defending, asktd: "So you are quarrelling.with the way the makers turn out these vehicles?"

Sergeant Bradford: " Yes, I think that all these vehicles make an excessive noise, and I think that every one of them commits an .offence."

Mr. Carless said that if the design were wrong it was a matter for some higher authority to prohibit the use of the vehicles until a modification had been introduced and the noise made unobjectionable.

On the second charge that Everitt failed to exhibit an identity certificate on the vehicle, a fine of £2 was imposed.

N.C.R.T.C.H. SUBSCRIPTIONS UP QUBSCRIPTION fates for members -)of the haulier section of the National Conference of Road Transport Clearing Houses are to he raised on January I. The new charges will be 14 4s. for owners of up to five vehicles, each additional vehicle to be charged 10s. 6d., up to a maximum of £15 15s.


comments powered by Disqus