1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140 
Special Types muddle
Page 25
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
FOLLOWING what are regarded as conflicting decisions by Shap magistrates concerning "Special Type" vehicles, Manchester heavy haulier, Kaye Goodfellow and Co Ltd, is to appeal.
The company was before the magistrates last week on summonses concerning two of its vehicles. In the first case there was police evidence that a semi-lowloader was seen northbound on M6 on September 28. It was stopped at the Shap interchange and when weighed at Carlisle was found to be 4,400kg in excess of the plated train weight under the Construction and Use Regulations.
Questioned by Mr Jonathan Lawton, defending, a police witness said the vehicle carried a mixed load of long steel, tubes and chain. He agreed the chain could have been ancillary equipment. When the vehicle was seen it was doing in excess of 20mph and although constructed for the carriage of abnormal indivisible loads its load was not of this character.
After evidence that the load was all steel being carried from Redpath, Dorman Long at Warrington to the Methil works in Fife, Mr Lawton submitted there was no case to answer.
It was clear the load consisted of steel, some of which was 72ft in length. and the vehicle was designed for such carriage. The weight limit was only for the purpose of the Construction and Use Regs, and because the vehicle exceeded 20mph it did not cease to be a special type.
Dismissingthe charge of overloading, the magistrates said they were in considerable doubt because of the complexity of the regulations.
They then considered three further summonses alleging excessive train weight and overloading of two axles of an articulated outfit on September 25, at Clifton on M6.
The prosecution said the vehicle, carrying steel, was doing 55mph and was stopped because of its excessive speed. A police witness agreed movement notices had been served on the police authori ties concerned by the company, in accordance with the Special Types Order. Although some steel was of long length the rest was much shorter and the vehicle was, consequently, not carrying abnormal indivisible loads of similar character. Because of this and the excessive speed the protection of the Special Types Order was lost and Construction and Use applied.
Mr Lawton submitted that the facts were the same as in the first case except that here the vehicle was actually operating under the Order.
The magistrates held the charges proved and fined the company £20 for each offence, a total of £60.