AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Compressed rubbish overload

17th March 1994, Page 17
17th March 1994
Page 17
Page 17, 17th March 1994 — Compressed rubbish overload
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?

• An overloaded refuse vehicle has cost Al lerdale District Council in Workington and one of its drivers £640 in fines and costs. The council, operating as Allerdale Contracting, and refuse truck driver John Hodgson pleaded guilty before Penrith Magistrates to exceeding the permitted second axle weight of the vehicle by 1,200kg, {11.4%). Defending, John Collinson said that as rubbish was loaded into the vehicle it was compressed to the front. The equipment was designed to stop once the permitted gross weight was reached but problems arose if heavy material was picked up towards the end of the trip, as that meant there was greater weight at the rear.

The gross weight had been within 50kg of the legal limit and the driver had no way of knowing what the axle weights were. The council had since spent £15,500 equipping its refuse vehicles with on-board weighers. The gross weight of the vehicle had been reduced to 15.5 tonnes as it had been found that it was not moving the weight between the axles as it ought to. The council was fined £500 and Hodgson £100.


comments powered by Disqus