AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Recovery lorry ruling V8 Sherpa to

24th August 1985
Page 6
Page 6, 24th August 1985 — Recovery lorry ruling V8 Sherpa to
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?

beat V6

THE DIVISIONAL Court has ruled that a suitably constructed breakdown or recovery vehicle does not require a test plate or an excise duty licence.

It dismissed an appeal against Harlow Justices last year that Holding and Barnes Ltd and Steven James Holloway, the owner and driver of a lorry used to recover two mechanically disabled vehicles by raising and carrying one and towing the other, were not guilty of using the vehicle without plating and test certificates.

The court also allowed T. L. Harvey Ltd's appeal against Coleshill justices' decision in January this year that it broke the law by using a recovery vehicle with a trade licence to convey two accident damaged vehicles in a similar way without plating and test certificates, excise licence or operator's licence.

Giving judgment, Mr Justice Bedlam said that in the first appeal the vehicle was equipped with a crane behind the cab, had one disabled car on the flatbed body, and another towed with the front wheels suspended from the crane.

In the other appeal, the vehicle had a winch to lift a disabled vehicle on to it and could tow another vehicle behind.

If they met the plating and testing requirements br breakdown vehicles, then they could be operated without either a plating and test certificate or an operator's licence.

Tags

Organisations: DIVISIONAL Court

comments powered by Disqus