AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Myer cleared: Roadferry fined

20th October 1988
Page 11
Page 11, 20th October 1988 — Myer cleared: Roadferry fined
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?

Driver John Leach got an )Solute discharge for an axle verload last week through 7rexharn Magistrates. His emoyer, Roadferry Services, as not so lucky, being fined 100 and ordered to pay ,260 :-osecution costs.

Leach was given his dislarge when the court :cepted his argument that he id been given no reason to ispect that the truck had aen overloaded.

The Preston-based company, id Leach admitted overloading le two compensating trailer des of an articulated outfit irrying timber.

For the prosecution, it was lid that when the vehicle had en checked at the Trading tandards weighbridge at uthin it had been found that ie compensating axles were verloaded by some 2,370 kg. In evidence, Leach said that ie trailer had been loaded venly along its length, with a mble pack of timber just in ont of the trailer axles.

He had been aware that the am n weight had been within le permitted limit, and had A doubted that the load on ie vehicle would be legal. here had been nothing un3ual about the load, which had veared to him to be correctly mitioned.

Defending, Jonathan Lawton lid there had been no practicmethod of checking the trail:. axle weights and no reason ir the driver to have sus..cted that they needed checkg. Leach was an extremely experienced driver and he had formed the view that there had been nothing illegal in the way the vehicle had been loaded.

Lawton argued that the company's duty of care had been met if it sent out a properly instructed and qualified driver with an adequate vehicle to collect the load.

He asked the magistrates to give both company and driver an absolute discharge on the grounds that they had not been at fault.