More steps could be taken to stop overloading says dep LA
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
OVERLOADING of goods vehicles had to be stopped and many operators were not taking every possible step to prevent the commission of such offences. This comment was made by the West Midland deputy LA, Mr John Shufflebotham, at Birmingham last week, when two operators, Gauden Shepherd Ltd, Halesowen, and Hudsons of Dudley Ltd, had vehicles put off the road.
Gauden Shepherd Transport, he said had been before the LA in July, 1973, when the licence margin was removed and three vehicles and three trailers suspended for three months because of seven immediate and 13 delayed GV9 prohibitions. Since then there had been two convictions for overloading, in August and November, 1974, Mr Norman Carless, for the company, said both concerned axles; in the first case there was a mixed load and it was difficult for the driver to get it distributed evenly. The second case involved an inexperienced driver who distributed the load badly.
Mr G. Shepherd, managing director, said that since then the company's vehicles had received 12 separate checks without fault being found.Both drivers had since left the company's employ but drivers in general seemed incapable of taking in the importance of avoiding axle overloads. The problem was aggravated by the mixed loads carried.
After being told the company was proposing to put notices in the drivers' pay packets weekly and require them to sign undertakings not to overload, the deputy LA said although it was not a very serious case he was not satisfied all possible preventive steps had been taken. A greater degree of communication was required between operators and drivers. Two vehicles and two trailers would be suspended for two months. (The company operates 28 vehicles and 29 trailers.) Hudsons of Dudley, had been before the LA in August, 1974, and were convicted before Dudley magistrates for 13 offences of overloading in November, 1974. The deputy LA said that a warning letter was sent following an overloading conviction in March, 1973. At the 1974 public inquiry a failure to keep proper records as well as overloading was considered.
Mr M. Hudson, a director, said the company was moving scrap metal from Brierley Hill to a steelworks 5,4 of a-mile away and had believed it was meeting its responsibilities by weighing at the delivery point. It later transpired there was a public weighbridge 200 yd in the opposite direction, but that this was not always manned.
Mr Hudson agreed he had given undertakings at the last inquiry concerning overloading. The scrap was from a dismantling job out of the usual run and had now been completed. All traffic moving from the company's own two yards was weighed, but the depot was a five-mile trip from Brierley Hill. The deputy LA said he took the view that 13 charges and heavy fines did not necessarily reflect the gravity of the offence, but there was a history of overloading by the company which imposed a very much greater duty to ensure further offences did not occur. One vehicle would be suspended for a month. (The company operates seven vehicles and three trailers.)