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
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 
Use of recovery vehicle for hire or
Page 34
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
reward costs operator £500 A LONDON operator w ho used a recovery truck to transport a vehicle that was not disabled has been ordered to pay £500 in fines and costs.
Linford Michael of Bermondsey: pleaded not guilty to the offences.
Prosecuting for VOSA. Anthony Ostrin told the Barking magistrates that Michael had been driving an Iveco recovery vehicle when it was checked at Dagenham. The vehicle had a gross weight of 7.5 tonnes and was carrying a Nissan flatbed pickup.
The vehicle was not displaying an 0-licence disc hut Michael said he did not need an 0-licence because the vehicle was a recovery truck.
Traffic examiner Robert Balmer told the court that in the circumstances the vehicle was not exempt from having an 0-licence or a test certificate. The vehicle being carried was not a disabled vehicle so the recovery truck was being used for transportation of a vehicle for hire or reward.
Finding Michael guilty, the magistrates said he was unable to show that the vehicle was disabled so the exemption did not apply.
Michael was fined £100 for having no 0-licence and f50 for having no test certificate with £350 costs.