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 
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.
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
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