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 
TNT appeal wins fines reduction
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Parcels and logistics firm TNT (UK) has been partially successful in an appeal against fines of £2,200 imposed for overloading offences by Barking Magistrates ( CMNov 15-21).
Anthony Ostrin, for the Vehicle Inspectorate, told Snareshrook Crown Court that a two-axle rigid carrying mixed goods had been stopped in a weight check in September 2000. When weighed it was found that the maximum permitted weight of the front axle of 3.200kg was exceeded by 730kg, some 22.81%. The maximum permitted gross weight of 7,500kg had been exceeded by 1,730kg, some 23.07%. The magistrates had fined the company £1,100 for each offence.
For TNT, Leslie Smith said that although the company had been prosecuted for two offences, it was essentially one matter. The overload had occurred because of human error after the night operator had had a death in the family He maintained that TNT had adequate procedures in place to prevent such offences. Spot checks were carried out and there was on-going training for the staff.
Judge Platt said that he was prepared to accept that it was essential N a single incident because there was both a gross
and axle overweight incorpo rated in the gross overloac However, he took a serious vim of the facts and considered tha it had been a serious overioac There had been a significan breakdown in the system fo those responsible for the vehicl, and he could not see how a con' 'outer had not picked up th error—the vehicle had not bee properly checked in his view.
He considered that th appropriate penalty was t increase the fine for the gros overload to £1,500 with no sepE rate penalty for the axl overload.