AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Weight ticket unidentified

19th April 1990, Page 20
19th April 1990
Page 20
Page 20, 19th April 1990 — Weight ticket unidentified
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?

• Teesside Magistrates have ordered that the defence costs of Stevenson Bros (Avonbridge) be paid out of public funds, after dismissing allegations that the company had exceeded the permitted train weight of a 38-tonne articulated vehicle.

Senior trading standards officer John Holman said that he had obtained weighbridge tickets from the potash terminal at Tees Dock, Grangetown. One of the tickets indicated that an artic operated by the company had a train weight of some 42,280kg.

Statements were read from a representative of Philip Saint, the consignor, and from the operator of the weighbridge.

Jonathan Lawton, defending, said Saint had been unable to say who had carried the load concerned. He had merely repeated information contained on the weight ticket, which had clearly been put in front of him. Not only was the defendant company not identified, but reference was made on the weight ticket, under the heading 'haulier' to Bulk Freight. He did not know who or what that might refer to. Additionally in his statement the weighbridge operator not only referred to Bulk Freight, but simply said that the vehicle arrived at the weighbridge.

Articulation meant that a tractor could couple and uncouple to semi-trailers at will, said Lawton.

On the evidence, it was quite impossible to say that the Stevenson vehicle had travelled on the public road before the weighing took place.


comments powered by Disqus