AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Driver not company liable for overload offence

4th August 1994, Page 19
4th August 1994
Page 19
Page 19, 4th August 1994 — Driver not company liable for overload offence
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?

• Dewsbury-based Frank Richardson Transport was given an absolute discharge after Wetherlay magistrates accepted that a driver was to blame for a front axle overload. The magistrates heard that when its 7.5-tonner was stopped on the A58 in November, the front axle was found to exceed its permitted maximum by 320kg (11%).

For the company, Gary Hodgson said the vehicle had a load of seven 1.2m2 pallets on a 6m platform. The rear axle was 1.5 tonnes under its plated weight and the gross weight was 750kg below its maximum.

The driver was permitted to proceed after altering the position of one of the pallets. He was an experienced driver in his usual vehicle on a regular contract. He had clearly made a mistake in not checking the distribution of the load. The company's (drivers were regularly reminded about responsibilities for avoiding overloads,The company had weighing equipment but in this case the load had been picked up away from base. Hodgson argued that the company could not be said to have been negligent: it had taken all reasonable steps to prevent overloading. The magistrates fined the driver £120.

Tags

Locations: Dewsbury

comments powered by Disqus