1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164 
BT work clears driver
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• The driver of a vehicle belonging to ARM Construction (Chorley), has been cleared of a series of tachograph offences by Leeds Magistrates, on the grounds that the vehicle was exempt because it was working on a contract for British Telecom.
This follows a case in which Stockport Magistrates ordered £200 of ARM's costs to be paid out of public funds after no evidence was offered in a similar case (CM 15-21 March).
Thomas McCormick, of Leeds, pleaded not guilty to three offences of failing to use the mode switch, one of failing to make entries on the centre field of a chart, one of using a vehicle with an insecure load, and one of using a vehicle when the rear overhang exceeded a metre and was not clearly visible.
The company denied permitting the tachograph offences, and corresponding insecure load and overhang offences, The charges against the company were dismissed, after John Backhouse, defending, argued that the prosecution failed to prove McCormick was employed by the company.
Backhouse said that the vehicle was engaged on telephone and telegraph service work. Consequently, it was exempt from the tachograph regulations. Article 4 of EEC Regulation 3820/85 states that they shall not apply to vehicles used in connection with, among other things, telegraph and telephone services.
The magistrates dismissed all the charges except one in relation to an insecure load, for which they fined McCormick £200 and ordered him to pay £27 prosecution costs.