Post by grays on Jan 26, 2019 15:29:31 GMT
I got caught up in the christmas purge.. I would like to know other peoples experiences. I was over weight though due to a trailer design fault.. water had leaked between the inner and outer skin of the bodywork and put it 200kg over. Event trailer, not goods trailer.
Then they throw the book at you..
Here is the story
I was issued the above penalty notice at Tormanton Weighbridge yesterday
5.12.18, the Issueing Officer was Mr xxxx. I find it very unfair and
unjustified the notice was issued for the following reasons..
Firstly, an officer used his sensible discretion with the vehicle next to me and let him off
his tyre imperfections on the grounds that it was very dark and raining when
carrying out the pre-trip inspection that day using torch-light on the vehicle
Xxxxxx and the wear of the tyre was on the inside. -
This was also the case with me and my vehicle as the pre check was carried out
in Torch-light at 0630 in the rain, also a quarter of the tyre is hidden by the bodywork
itself and of course the worn area could have been facing the ground in the
puddles of water that morning. The worn area could only have been seen by
crawling under the vehicle if that particular point was not in the puddles or
facing upper-most.
The number plate light was found to be inoperative that morning and I waited for our onsite
garage to rectify it before departure. (all evidence attached)
Secondly, my vehicle had travelled nearly 100 miles in an overweight condition
which could have added additional wear to the one tyre in question (out of 12
tyres inspected) this is a unique trailer design fault due to water saturation and
not overloaded, because of this the vehicle has been taken out of service meaning I have lost my full time roll.
Thirdly, A brand new tyre was fitted within 10 minuets of Mr xxxx pointing out
the issue as I carry 3 new spare tyres and no sensible leniency was offered to
me.
I believe my professionalism was judged and I was issued a standard template answer to my appeal E-mail simply because my vehicle was overweight. Mr David xxxxxxx (enforcment manager) replied with "this could have all been avoided easily and quickly if the driver had carried out a proper walk-round check".
I find this extremely offensive, I am also a light aircraft pilot and I check my HGV as I would check an aircraft. all nuts,bolts, cabling,hydraulics and pneumatics are scrutinised so far as reasonably practical. (hence not departing with a number-plate light inoperative) A good walk-around check is not a crawl-around check in confined spaces,through puddles.
And finally
Following four independent reports from Quick Tyres Hatfield, ATS Tyres ST Albans, Kwik Fit Watford and National Tyres Watford, the tyre was found to be in permissible condition although due for a change soon because of the worn area.
I believe if tyre specialists say the tyre is permissible in daylight with 100% of the surfaces visible, how reasonable would it be for me to see the worn area in near complete darkness with less than 50% visible?
I would like to add that the although your other officers conducted themselves
with professionalism and empathy, Mr xxxx was rude, patronising and tried
to be intimidating.
I ask you to appeal this penalty with sensible, fair,realistic consideration. My
licence is otherwise clean and my reputation impeccable and has been for a very
long time. I pride myself on being a professional driver and its quite obviouse I have been witch-hunted.
Regards
G
