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 
Out-of-control drivers lead IC to slash authorisation
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A South Yorkshire haulier, who admitted that he was unable to control his drivers has escaped the revocation of his 0-licence 'by a whisker".
Instead North Eastern Traffic Commissioner Tom Macartney has cut the licence held by Geoffrey Harrison, trading as Harrison Plant & Haulage, of Doncaster, from 12 veNcles and eight trailers to two vehicles and four trailers.
In January 2000 Harrison had been convicted by Scunthorpe magistrates of 10 offences of failing to produce tachograph charts. In August 2001 he was fined £400 with £70 costs by Sheffield magistrates after pleading guilty to three offences of failing to produce tachograph records. He was also given a 12-month conditional discharge for exceeding the daily driving limit.
The IC heard evidence of poor maintenance and missing distance on tachograph records. On one occasion Harrison had driven for 10.5 hours in one day. On 15 May 2000 a company vehicle which was not displaying an 0-licence disc was seen in Scotland—it did not appear
on Harrison's licence until 20 May It tachograph records showed it had bee used since 2 April. The same vehicle W2 reported to have been seized by Custorr because of the use of rebated fuel.
For Harrison, David Chant said that 11 was now operating just one vehicle havir got rid of the others and his drivers. Th was being leased from a commerci, garage which would also be carrying oi the maintenance.
Harrison denied using red diesel as claimed he thought he had purchased whit diesel which had beer contaminated wil red. He also claimed there had been a ma gin on the licence at the time the vehicle m stopped in Scotland; he had simply failed I specify it within the time limit.
The TC said that no operator shoul have such a batch of convictions. Howeve because of the sweeping changes made h was able to take a more lenient view than h would otherwise have done.