AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

'Excessive' fine reduced

16th September 1993
Page 18
Page 18, 16th September 1993 — 'Excessive' fine reduced
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 Crown Court judge has described as "manifestly excessive" overloading fines of £20,000 imposed by Lytham Magistrates on a principal partner in B & H Haulage, of Carnforth.

Peter Barton appealed to Preston Crown Court against £2,500 fines for each of eight overloading offences. Recorder David Sumner reduced the fines to £400 per offence, a total of £3,200. The usual fine for these offences is between £400 and £700.

For Lancashire Trading Standards Department Richard Howarth said the offences came to light due to what became known as "back ticketing" while vehicles belonging to B & H Haulage were hauling material to a council landfill site at Clifton Marsh.

When a trading standards officer checked weight tickets at the site's weighbridge in October, he found that three of the firm's vehicles were overloaded on 15 occasions between 28 September and 5 October. The three vehicles were plated at 30,420kg and the overloads in the eight specimen offences before the court were between 1,770kg and 3,070kg The maximum fine for such offences is £5,000.

For Barton, Huw Davies said the firm had been operating for eight years and these were its first convictions. In the threeweek period of the contract, 542 journeys had been made to the landfill site. The driver signed a print-out at the weighbridge which would be delivered to the foreman of Kiernan's, the main contractor.

After Davies claimed the drivers had not known they were overloaded, having never been told, Judge Sumner said they could see they were overloaded merely by looking at the weight ticket.


comments powered by Disqus