AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

'Wrongly worded' charge dismissed

1st January 1998, Page 13
1st January 1998
Page 13
Page 13, 1st January 1998 — 'Wrongly worded' charge dismissed
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?

Keywords :

• The defence costs of Derby shire heavy haulier Heanor Haulage are to he paid out of public funds after the company was cleared of an alleged overloading offence with a special types vehicle.

The company had denied exceeding the gross weight of an articulated combination by 22.620kg, some 59.52%, before the Halifax Magistrates.

The magismates were told that because the company had failed to notify the movement of the load to West Yorkshire Police, and had failed to carry a driver's mate in the cab, it had lost the protection of the special types order.

Constable David Ellis said that he had seen the combination, which was carrying a crane, and it appeared lobe over the allowed 4.5m in width.

He took the vehicle to the A in ley Top dynamic axles weighbridge where he found the train weight to be 60,620kg.

Questioned by Jonathan Lawton, defending, PC Ellis could not recall whether there was another police officer with him. He said that he was unable to refer to his pocket book as he did not have it with him.

Asked to look at a certificate of weight, PC Ellis said that he did not recognise the document. He agreed that it appeared to be made out at the time of the check and that it bore the registration number of the vehicle concerned.

After Lawton had said that the certificate was clearly signed by senior traffic examiner Howard Mountain, PC Ellis said that he could not read the signature and that he did not know Mountain.

He agreed that the registration number written on the till roll from the weighbridge appeared to have been written by the person who had signed the certificate of weight. He was unable to say when the weighbridge was last tested for accuracy by trading standards.

Lawton pointed out that the charge had been wrongly worded in that it referred to gross weight when in fact it was being alleged that the train weight had been exceeded.

The magistrates ruled that the defence had no case to answer.

Tags

Organisations: West Yorkshire Police
Locations: Derby

comments powered by Disqus