AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Stobart is fined £640

6th February 1997
Page 14
Page 14, 6th February 1997 — Stobart is fined £640
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?

• Eddie fav Stobart Ltd has been fined 6 4 0 by Penrith magistrates for aiding and abetting the unauthorised use of a vehicle. But the firm was acquitted of using an 0licence with intent to deceive.

Michael Fisher, for the Vehicle Inspectorate, said that a 38-tonne artic in Stobart colours had been stopped in a roadside check. The tractor was displaying an 0-licence in the name of Eddie Stobart but the driver told a traffic examiner that he was employed by George Glendinning.

When Glendinning was interviewed he confirmed that he employed the driver and that the vehicle belonged to Stobart. He added that Stobart had found him work and that he did not realise that he needed an 0-licence.

Director William Stobart said that the vehicle had been carrying scrap tin out of the Metal Box premises in Carlisle. The hire charge of the vehicle was taken out of its earnings and the balance paid to Glendinning, said Stobart. He added that as it was the company's own vehicle he had not thought it wrong to specify it on the Stobart licence. He admitted that he had been aware that Glendinning did not have a licence of his own.

Glendinning, of Low Hesket, near Carlisle, pleaded guilty to using the vehicle without a licence and was fined .£240.


comments powered by Disqus