AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Lost wheel fine

12th October 1989
Page 20
Page 20, 12th October 1989 — Lost wheel 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?

• Manchester-base W Maher & Son was ordered to pay fines and costs totallin E80 at the Sale magistrate after admitting using a veh cle with a defective tyre.

The company and one oJ its drivers, Eamon Kennedy, were each charged with using a vehicle with a defective tyre and with fail ing to maintain wheelnuts, following an accident when wheel became detached from a vehicle driven by Kennedy. The company admitted the tyre offence but denied failing to maintain the wheelnuts. Kennedy admitted failing to maintain the wheelnuts but denied the tyre offence.

Prosecuting, Alan Fletcr er said a wheel had sheere off the tipper driven by Kennedy, causing an accident involving two cars on the M63 motorway. One o the tyres on the tipper wa: found to be completely ball Barry Howard, Maher's tyre fitter, said that two days prior to the accident tyre on the vehicle concerned was found to be de fective and was replaced. The other tyres were checked and all had adequate tread depth.

Kennedy said he had checked the vehicle that morning.

For Kennedy, Diane Nichol produced reports in Commercial Motor indicatin that other courts had granted absolute discharge.1 in lost wheel cases.

For Maher, John Backhouse said that on the kind of work done by the vehicles, the tread could wear very quickly. The company did a great deal to prevent that sort of thing occurring The magistrates gave Kennedy an absolute discharge and fined Maher 26( and 20 costs.