AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Examiner's cross-check spots records offences

4th July 1969, Page 46
4th July 1969
Page 46
Page 46, 4th July 1969 — Examiner's cross-check spots records offences
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?

• Crow Carrying Co. Ltd., London, El 6, pleaded guilty to 12 summonses for failing to cause drivers' records to be kept and was fined a total of £36 with 10 guineas costs at East Ham magistrates' court on Monday. Two company drivers, H. Bence and C. Rogers pleaded guilty to failing to keep current records and were fined £24 for eight offences and £12 for four offences respectively.

It was said in court that an MoT examiner had called at the premises of J. Crossfield and Co. Ltd., London, E16, on November 29 1968 and had noted an 8-ton artic. tanker specified on a Contract A licence parked unattended in the yard. The examiner later attended the okices of Crow Carrying Co. Ltd. to check the records of that vehicle and found them to show that on November 29 1968 the vehicle was mid-way between Cardiff and London. Following this, other records were checked bringing the other offences to light.

It was said on Crow's behalf that the vehicles were stationed permanently at Crossfield's premises and only came to Crow's depot to fill-up with fuel or for maintenance. A full-time staff was employed there to check vehicles in and out and arrangements had now been made to do the same at Crossfield's.

Mr. Rogers said he had never worked over the permitted maximum hours. The hours were spread because if his Union (TGWU) discovered he was covering more mileage in the time specified by the union in agreement with Crow Carrying he would be fined.

Both drivers were suspended by the company for one day as a disciplinary measure.