AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Part-success in Appeal

6th November 1964
Page 52
Page 52, 6th November 1964 — Part-success in Appeal
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?

A STAFFORDSHIRE haulage firm was

given permission to keep in use its most modern vehicles when it appealed, to the Transport Tribunal in London on Wednesday, against revocation of its licences by the West Midland Licensing Authority. But five other vehicles were suspended for one year.

R. Hampton and Sons, of Wednesbury, appealed against a decision which revoked the two vehicles from an eight-vehicle A licence and suspended five vehicles from their 50-vehicle Contract A licence.

Mr. E. S. Fay, Q.C., for the firm, said it. was run by three brothers, who were charged at Wednes bury in January this year, and convicted after admitting 22 charges of overloading vehicles. The charges referred to 20 Contract offences and two on A licence.

The firm asked for more than 500 other offences to be taken into account. All these offences took place in a period of 33 days between the end of December last year, and the end of January.

The firm was fined £960 with £105 costs.

The two vehicles which were revoked from the open A licence could have carried 4 tons more under the new Regulations, which stated that increased weight might be carried if the vehicles were plated by the manufacturer.

Mr. Fay said that the three partners had learnt their lesson, and their appearance in court had had a "shattering effect" on them.

A steel company which relied upon the hauliers for transport would suffer if the appeal were dismissed.


comments powered by Disqus