AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tacho blunder costs E200

15th March 1990, Page 30
15th March 1990
Page 30
Page 30, 15th March 1990 — Tacho blunder costs E200
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?

IN Stockport Magistrates ordered that up to £200 of the defence costs of ARM Construction (Chorley) should be paid out of public funds after the prosecution offered no evidence about an alleged tachograph offence involving a vehicle on contract to British Telecom.

The company had denied using a vehicle with a faulty tachograph which it had failed to have repaired.

John Backhouse, defending, said it had been explained to the prosecution some time ago that the vehicle concerned had been engaged on British Telecom work, and so was exempt from the tachograph regulations. Article 4 of EC Regulations 3820/85 does not apply to vehicles used in connection with telegraph and telephone services.

Mug

6 6

Tags

People: John Backhouse

comments powered by Disqus