AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Discharge for overweight artic

6th February 1997
Page 15
Page 15, 6th February 1997 — Discharge for overweight artic
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?

• GB Express (Midlands) was given an absolute discharge by Poole magistrates after the company admitted exceeding the permitted train weight of a 38-tonne artic. But driver Anthony Holland was fined £1 20 with £50 costs.

Michael Hanneford, prosecuting, said that when Holland's artic was stopped in a weight check it was found to exceed its permitted train weight by 1,260kg, (3.31%). Jonathan Lawton, defending, said that both driver and company had intended to deny the offence but changed their minds after a High Court ruling. This said that the certificate of weight issued to a driver by enforcement staff was presumed accurate unless the defence could prove otherwise. Lawton said that the weight of the load shown on the CMR note was well within the permitted carrying capacity of the outfit. He added that as the design weight was some 54 tonnes, there would have been nothing to indicate to the driver that there was a problem, and no danger had been caused. The court heard that there were no public weighbridges in the area and it was unfortunate that the split plate weighbridge used by the enforcement officers was not available to hauliers.


comments powered by Disqus