AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Confusion about taxing asphalt boiler vehicles

29th October 1998
Page 29
Page 29, 29th October 1998 — Confusion about taxing asphalt boiler vehicles
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?

• Insufficient publicity for budget changes, and a High Court decision which meant asphalt hailer vehicles have to be taxed as goods vehicles, were said to be the reason their operators continue to tax them at the private light goods rate of 1:150 when Charley-based Noriphalt appeared before the Liverpool City Magistrates.

The company admitted taxing an asphalt boiler vehicle at the wrong rate of duty, and failing to have a two-year tachograph calibration check.

Andrew Woolfall, defending, said that for some years such vehicles had had their own tax classification. However, following various budget changes and the ruling of the High Court in the

6 A case of Derbyshire, they were now taxed as goods vehicles. That fact had been given insufficient publicity, and operators were continuing to tax such vehicles at the private light goods rate, often on the advice of the local vehicle licensing office.

The tachograph offence had simply been the result of an oversight, said W(x)ifall. When the tachograph was inspected, nothing was found to be wrong with either the equipment or the records it produced.

Fining the company £50 for the \TED offence, stipendary magistrate Jonathan Turner said he accepted that it had been a genuine mistake. He ordered the company to pay 1:585 back duty and £150 prosecution costs, and fined it 1250 for the tachograph offence.

Tags

Organisations: High Court
Locations: Charley

comments powered by Disqus