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
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188 
Charles Burke Owner-driver/truck dealer TRS Engineering Rhondda Valley, Mid Glamorgan
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Burke was against the whole idea last summer and remains so now.
His key objection is still that the driver is the one being held responsible, not the company. Yet a number of offences may arise not because of the driver's own negligence, but because of an underlying fault that his or her employer failed to pick up on.
In the heat of the moment, he fears, many drivers will simply cough up to get back on the road.
"It's just not right to fine drivers money they don't have for offences that they may not be responsible for," argues Burke.
"Basically, you are taking food out of the mouths of that driver's family based on a decision made by a Vosa official or a police officer at the roadside.
"Is it right for a Vosa official or police officer to be both judge and jury? I don't think so. If the driver has committed a serious offence, why not impound his lorry?
"There will be many situations where the driver believes he is innocent, but because of the rigmarole involved in going to court, he pays the fine."