Dynamic weigher doubts dismissed
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Claims by Stoke-on-Trentbased Baymex that the accuracy 1 = of the dynamic axle weigher at Doxey, Staffs, could be in doubt, have been rejected by Stafford Magistrates.
The company and driver Alan Lees were convicted of overloading a 38 tonne artic by 1,570kg, some 4.13%. Baymex was fined £200 and ordered to pay £250 prosecution costs; Lees was fined 275 with £50 costs.
The magistrates rejected a request for an adjournment to hear evidence from trading standards officers and a traffic examiner who had made statements regarding the accuracy of the weighbridge. They said that the case had already been adjourned and the defendants had been given more than enough time to decide whether to challenge the evidence of the witnesses concerned, and ask for their attendance.
Questioned by Christopher Lee, defending, traffic examiner Edwin Broome agreed that none of the axles on the 3><3 artic had been over their permitted weights. He denied that the driver had asked for the vehicle to be re-weighed.
Lee said that a CMR note issued in Spain showed the weight of the load had been 21.5 tonnes, and that threw doubt on the accuracy of the result of the weighing at Doxey. On arrival at Portsmouth the customs had opened the vehicle up and weighed a number of cartons to satisfy themselves that the weight of the load was correct.
Lees maintained that he had asked for the vehicle to be reweighed at Doxey.
Questioned by Patrick McKnight, prosecuting for the West Midland Traffic Area, Lees agreed that he had not check-weighed the vehicle prior to the Doxey check. Asked why he had not weighed the vehicle after leaving Doxey, and before delivering to Liverpool, he said that the delivery was very urgent. He was not aware of any available weighbridges and it could have cost him as much as 11/2 hours.