AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Recovery operator wins back truck

29th January 2004
Page 30
Page 30, 29th January 2004 — Recovery operator wins back truck
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?

A RECOVERY VEHICLE operator has won his impounded vehicle back after the North Western Deputy Traffic Commissioner accepted that he was unaware he needed an 0-licence. Joseph Jones. of Merton Road. Bootle, had applied to the North Western DTC Mark Hinchliffe for the return of the vehicle, which had been impounded on 5 December at Liverpool Freeport.

Traffic examiner Colin Rowlands said that on 5 December the vehicle was stopped in a check while carrying scrap vehicles to a scrap yard. Jones told Rowlands he believed it was exempt from 0-licens. ing as it travelled less than five miles a day. However the only such exemption for vehicles was for those travelling less than six miles a week between privatt premises.

For Jones, Tim Culpin said his business involvec the recovery and disposal of abandoned and disable( vehicles under contract to Sefton Council. The vehicle in question was acquired 12 months ago Jones consulted the Guide to 0-Licensing to see if ar 0-licence was required.The guide did not define whai constituted a recovery vehicle. Consequently. Jonei telephoned the Traffic Area Office and was told that ii it was a recovery vehicle it was exempt.

The environmental provisions required the disabled cars to be taken to Jones' yard where fuel an lubricants had to be removed before being taken tc a breaker's yard. Culpin maintained Jones had done everything he reasonably could to find out whethet an 0-licence was required and in fact it fell within the exemption for recovery vehicles.


comments powered by Disqus