AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Court back brakes fine

8th October 1992, Page 12
8th October 1992
Page 12
Page 12, 8th October 1992 — Court back brakes fine
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?

Keywords : Brakes, Railway Brake

• Carlisle Crown Court has rejected an appeal by Ingle ton haulier Thomas Lishman against a £100 fine for using a vehicle with a badly adjusted brake. But the court removed an endorsement from Lishman's driving licence.

Lishman said that there had been a slight air leak from a union on the front offside when the service brake was applied. The vehicle had only received a delayed prohibition since the compressor had sustained adequate pressure in the system. Some engine work had been done and it was possible that the brake pipe had been knocked by accident.

For Lishman, John Backhouse said that the Kendal magistrates had given the driver of the vehicle an absolute discharge and decided not to endorse his driving licence.

ow,)

!kg.

Quoshing the endorsement, Judge Edmondson said he accepted that Lishman had not known, and had had no reasonable cause to suspect, that the fault existed. However, he felt that the fine of £100 was appropriate.


comments powered by Disqus