PG9 stands despite absolute discharge
Page 10
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• by David Craik Surrey-based haulier Cranleigh Freight Services has been told by the Vehicle Inspectorate that it cannot appeal against a prohibition it received for a significant maintenance failure last year, even though a magistrates court granted the company an absolute discharge on the same offence.
Cranleigh driver Peter Nias was issued with an immediate prohibition endorsed "S" for a significant maintenance failure last September. Managing director Colin Young says this was due to a "yellow air line becoming disconnected from the trailer which the driver simply recoupled". The prohibition was then lifted.
When Young and Nias appeared before Lewes magistrates on 19 May they were given absolute discharges. "To be given an "S" on a P09 is unsatisfactory," says Young.
But Heather Cruickshank, customer services manager at the VI, says there is no statutory right of appeal against a prohibition notice.
She says the VI is "satisfied that the prohibition was correctly issued. The defect would have been detected had a pre-journey inspection of the vehicle been undertaken by the driver."
Transport solicitor Jonathan Lawton, who defended Cranleigh in court, says: "At the court hearing the VI agreed that the fine could have come uncoupled at any time. The magistrates were satisfied that there was no fault on the part of the company or driver. I advised Cranleigh to write to the VI to have the "S" marking removed—I do not see how the "S" marking can be supported."