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
141
142
143
144 
Price paid for tacho failures
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
, A driver who failed to hand in his tachograph charts within 21 days was fined £360 and cost an east London operator more than 11,400.
The driver, Michael Curtis, who admitted three offences of failing to hand in charts, was fined £360 and ordered to pay £100 costs.
Bywaters (Leyton), which pleaded guilty to three offences before City of London magistrates, was fined £330 for each offence and had to pay £443 prosecution costs.
Prosecuting for the Vehicle Inspectorate, Anthony Ostrin said a skip wagon belonging to the company and driven by Curtis was stopped in a roadside check in January. Curtis produced his chart for the current day and numerous charts which were more than 21 days old. When asked why he still had them, he said he had forgotten to hand them in. He told the traffic examiner that the tachograph charts were examined every night and handed back to him.
When interviewed, a company representative had no explanation to offer but said the matter would be investigated and a review carried out to ensure that it did not happen again.
Indicating that the offences were serious, Ostrin said that both drivers and employers had an obligation to ensure that charts were handed in so that they could be investigated and operators could ascertain whether there were infringements on the charts. If there were, they should be pointed out to the driver and systems devised to prevent it happening again.
For the company, Ray Pidgley said that the company's systems had been changed. Letters had been issued to drivers pointing out their responsibilities and a new transport clerk had been appointed to ensure that offences such as these were not repeated.