onvidion for 18-month old offence
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
It was rather surprising and, to say the , unusual that the DoE should continue ress charges against Yardley Transport of Leeds which related to offences that committed as long ago as July 1971. his was said by Mr T. H. Campbell dlaw for the company when it pleaded y to six charges of failing to cause Dnt drivers' records to be kept and five ge§ of failing to examine and sign ers' records, before Leeds city istrates this week. Two further charges tiling to cause records to be kept were urned sine die and the prosecution withdrew six charges of permitting drivers to exceed their legal maximum hours.
Mr Michael Patterson, prosecuting for the Yorkshire LA, said the offences came to light during a routine check of the company's records by DoE staff. It was not alleged that records were not being kept or that they were false but that some of the required information was missing. When interviewed concerning the offences the company's secretary, Mr G. B. Cox, had said that the company handled a large number of records each week and the ones that had not been signed had been overlooked.
In mitigation Mr Campbell Wardlaw said the defendant company was a large, well-known reputable company operating 60 vehicles and employing 100 drivers. The offences were in relation to the book-keeping side of the drivers' hours and records regulations. If the company noted omissions in its drivers' recotds it could only point them out to the drivers. The drivers could not alter the records at that stage.
The magistrates fined the company a total of £85.