Turner trade plates ok
Page 13
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Cannock plant hire and earth moving contractors M H Turner (Contractors) Limited has been cleared of the misuse and the fraudulent use of trade plates by the Telford Magistrates. The company had denied the charges which related to its use of an articulated vehicle under trade plates to carry a dump truck.
Prosecuting for the West Midland traffic area, Patrick McKnight said it was alleged that the company had displayed trade plates to cover up the fact that the vehicle was not taxed.
Traffic examiner Dennis Whalley said the outfit, which had a low-loader trailer, was stopped in a goods vehicle check at Sutton Maddock on October 5, 1985. In reply to Geoffrey Davies, defending, he agreed that a goods vehicle carrying a load while displaying trade plates was bound to attract attention from enforcement authorities.
McKnight said that when the company's managing director Malcolm Turner was interviewed he had said that the dump truck was being taken to a site, where a fitter was going to put a hydraulic pump on it to rectify a fault. The fault was only minor and the dump truck was not disabled.
Evidence was given by Turner that the trailer was fitted with a 25-tonne winch and that the tractive unit was used under trade plates as a recovery vehicle. Without hydraulics, the dump truck had no steering and was unable to tip. It was not a major job to change the pump. The dump truck was still able to move backwards and forwards in a straight line and that was why he had said that it was not disabled.
The vehicle had been recovered from a site and taken to the company's yard for re pair when it received a request for a dump truck from the site where the fitter was working. He had the only hydraulic pump available within the company and the obvious thing seemed to be to take the dump truck to the site and let the fitter repair it there. He believed that the company had been making proper and legitimate use of its trade plates.
Questioned by McKnight, Turner agreed the dump truck was being taken from the company's workshop to the site and not the other way round. He denied that it had already been repaired. He agreed that he had not told the traffic examiner that the artic was a recovery vehicle.
Davies argued that the articulated vehicle was a recovery vehicle being properly used under trade licence to carry a disabled vehicle. The dump truck was being taken from where it had broken down to the place where it was going to be repaired. For the company to be guilty of fraudulent use, the prosecution had to show it had been guilty of dishonest intent.