AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tacho 'wire' deemed OK

14th April 1994, Page 19
14th April 1994
Page 19
Page 19, 14th April 1994 — Tacho 'wire' deemed OK
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?

• Arbroathbased haulier Raymond McEwan has been cleared of operating a truck with recording equipment which did not comply with the regulations, after an extra wire was found protruding from its tachograph.

McEwan pleaded not guilty before the Alnwick Magistrates. The driver of the vehicle, George Baird, had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing, being fined £240 and ordered to pay £35 in prosecution costs.

The court was told that when interviewed, McEwan had denied any knowledge of the wire.

Traffic examiner John Ainley said that when he checked the vehicle he discovered a wire which ought not to have been there protruding from the junction box next to the glove compartment.

He followed the wire and found that a crocodile clip was attached to the other end. At the time of the check, it was simply fastened to the plastic cabling

Questioned by John Backhou,se, defending, Ainley agreed that the crocodile clip would need to be earthed to have

any effect on the tachograph. It was not earthed when he saw it. He said that the tachograph was working properly at the time. He had not tested it when earthed to see if it had any effect nor had he checked that the wire was present when the tachograph was calibrated.

Arguing that no offence had been revealed, Backhouse pointed out that it was not illegal to have an additional device unless it interfered with the operation of the equipment. There was no evidence that the wire was interfering with the tachograph or would have done.

Ruling no case to answer, the magistrates directed defence costs be met out of public funds.


comments powered by Disqus