Overloading fine halved
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• A judge has halved a fine imposed on Knowles Transport by magistrates, because he felt a driver was as much to blame as the company for an overloading offence.
The Wimblington, Cambridgeshire-based company had appealed to Exeter Crown Court against a 2400 fine for exceeding the train weight of a 38-tonne artic by 1,010kg (2.65%).
The court was told that the driver of the vehicle had been specifically instructed on the collection note to weigh the vehicle after loading. For Knowles, John Backhouse said that the weight found on the dynamic weighbridge used to checkweigh the vehicle was disputed.
When the unladen weight was added to the weights shown on the consignment note the total was less than that alleged.
He argued that the court ought to apply the statutory margin of error, in this case 900kg, when considering the amount of the excess.
Backhouse referred to a Commercial Motor report of the case of E Dowse & Sons, at Leeds Crown Court (CM 18 October 1986) and to the High Court decision in Hart vs Bex. In both cases it was indicated that an absolute discharge was appropriate if a defendant was morally blameless for an overloading offence.
He said that the driver had failed to carry out his instructions and had been disciplined. There was nothing more that the company could have done.
Reducing the fine to 2200, and ordering Knowles appeal costs to be paid out of public funds, Judge Jonathan Clarke said that he was not impressed by arguments that there should have been no penalty because the excess was less than 5% of the train weight.