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 
Weight in question
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• An official weighbridge gave an incorrect weight reading, it was alleged recently at Taverham. Norfolk. magistrates' court when Aldridge Haulage Ltd, of Dereham Road, Costessey, denied using an articulated vehicle when the rear axle was overloaded.
Mr A. Kerrford, prosecuting, said that one of the company's lorries was stopped and taken to a heavy goods vehicle testing station near Costessey where the lorry was weighed and the rear axle found to be overloaded by 1 ton 6 cwt. Mr L. Dunekley, for the firm, said that his client claimed the weighbridge measurements were not accurate.
Mr William Littleboy, managing director, said that later he conducted an experiment by weighing the rear axle of the same vehicle, loaded with the same weight of the same .goods on the firm's weighbridge. This time the weight was 8 tons 13cwt. But the magistrates found the case proven and fined the firm £10 and ordered the payment of £10 advocate's fee.
Mr Littleboy told a CM correspondent on Wednesday that he hoped something could be done about the hgv testing station weighbridge. Unlike the one owned by his firm which had a 30ft electrical weighbridge, the DoE weighbridge measured 10ft and a lorry had to be weighed in three sections. "I think a human error was made at the testing station'," he said. "1 don't think you can weigh a vehicle in three parts and give absolutely accurate weights."