AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

£345 for inexperience

22nd December 1994
Page 18
Page 18, 22nd December 1994 — £345 for inexperience
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?

• Licence, vehicle and hours offences have cost Golborne-based Harry Hayes £345 in fines and costs.

Hayes, trading as H Hayes Transport, of Stacldiouse Farm, Golborne, appeared before magistrates in Leigh, Lancs. He pleaded guilty to fraudulently using an 0-licence disc; using a vehicle when the tachograph had not been checked within the previous six years; using a vehicle without an 0-licence; using a vehicle without a test certificate; seven offences of permitting Michael Durran to drive for more than 4.5 hours without a 45 minute break, and using a vehicle when the tachograph was not in use from the moment the vehicle was taken over.

Prosecuting, Alan Bakker said that a vehicle being driven by Durran was stopped by police in April. An 0-licence disc with faded writing was displayed in the windscreen. In the vehicle was Hayes' wife Pauline, who said they were going to apply for a licence. An examination of the tachograph charts revealed Durran's offences In addition there was 40km unrecorded on 21 March when Hayes had been driving the vehicle.

Defending, Neil Bowland said that Hayes had no experience of haulage. He had spent most of his life in the pits before being made redundant in 1989 and bought a B-registered vehicle to carry his wife's horses.

Hayes was then approached by an individual who asked if he would loan him the vehicle and a driver, paying him £80 a week. That individual secured an 0-licence for the vehicle in his own name.

After a time the vehicle needed to be replaced and Hayes was told that the 0-licence would be sorted out. The person concerned indicated that he was going into a partnership and offered Hayes the opportunity to take over some of his contracts.

Hayes took over the contracts but paid no attention to the operator's licence. As long as the tax disc was displayed that was all he was concerned about. He had not realised that the 0-licence should have been changed to his name.

Hayes was fined £75 for the fraudulent use; £50 for having no 0-licence; £50 for the test certificate offence; £50 for failing to have the tachograph checked; and £25 on the first permitting offence, with no separate penalty on the remainder. He was ordered to pay £95 costs.