AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Why LAs are tough on truck operators

23rd November 1989, Page 157
23rd November 1989
Page 157
Page 157, 23rd November 1989 — Why LAs are tough on truck operators
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?

AN OPERATOR was advised to write P4 to his drivers pointing out axle and gross weight problems and emphasizing that in doubt they should check weight at the nearest weighbridge.

• OVERLOADED axles lead to a detenoranon in the road surface, and not bad design or poor quality construction materials. That was why courts were so tough with heavy goods vehicle operators and why they had to pay such large sums in vehicle excise duty, said South Wales LA John Mervyn Pugh.

Vernon Nicholas, of Llangennith, appeared before the LA at disciplinary proceedings following two sets of convictions for excess axle and gross weights, which had led to fines totalling £975 being imposed. The LA pointed out that a 38-tonne artic with an overloaded axle was the equivalent of 10,760 cars. He said that it was artics "bouncing" on the roads that caused all the problems.

For Nicholas, Geoffrey Davies said that the first set of convictions arose from bags, stamped as weighing 25kg, being in fact heavier. The second set of offences arose when a load was not properly positioned on the trailer of the artic concerned.

Taking no action other than to record a warning, the LA advised Nicholas to write to all his drivers, pointing out the problems and emphasising that if they had any doubts about weight they should go to the nearest weighbridge to check weigh.

That would be good mitigation on any future occasion, as Nicholas would have done what any reasonable man could do, said the LA.