AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

• Customer's Liability in Illegal Vehicle Operation

28th December 1962
Page 7
Page 7, 28th December 1962 — • Customer's Liability in Illegal Vehicle Operation
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?

W/HEN Mr. T. E. Peacock of Avey VY Lane, Waltham Abbey, Essex, Was convicted recently at Arnpthill Magistrates Court, Bedford. of operating a goods vehicle without an appropriate. carrier's licence, without a current certificate of insurance and without a current excise licence, a customer whose load was being carried at the time of the offence was convicted of aiding and 'abetting the accused on the first and third counts. . , Peacock pleaded guilty by letter and, was fined a total of £20.

Prosecuted for aiding and abetting. Peacock on ' the carrier's licence and excise licence charges was J. S. Webber Ltd. of Stanley Road, London, E.4.

Supt. R. E. Morgan, prosecuting, quoted Carter v. Mace, 1949, and said it had been established in the High Court that a transport clearing house acting as an agent was liable if hauliers it engaged were not licensed and insured. Supt. Morgan contended that although J. S. Webber Ltd. was not a transport clearing house, nevertheless it had a similar liability.

Mr. D. J. Elvin. for J. S. Webber, sub

mitted that there was no liability whatever. He quoted as an example the householder who wanted to move his furniture and could hardly be held responsible if the furniture removers were not properly licensed and insured.

P.C. Brian Jackson said he saw Mr. J. S. Webber at his Office concerning the alleged offences and Mr. Webber told him that surely he was entitled to expect that a haulier he engaged was properly covered. Mr. Webber said he had engaged Peacock on the telephone to move his goods . from another part of London, namely Edmonton, and take them to Ellesmere Port, Cheshire. In order to have checked Peacock's papers, said Mr. Webber, he would have had to visit Peacock's yard • on a Sunday night especially to do so.

The magistrates nevertheless found the case proved and the defendant was fined Li on each count, with 25s. costs.

Mr. D. J. Elvin, for S. J. Webber, then expressed an intention of appealing against the conviction.

The Commercial Motor understands that an appeal has now been lodged.


comments powered by Disqus