overloaded 90%

[pipsaholic]

I'm in the process of being summoned to court over section 40A of the road traffic act 1988 UK for overloading and my vehicle in a condition likely to cause an injury.

The police fixed penalty scheme didn't cover 90% overloading so they have referred it to the magestriate court for prosecution.

It's my first serious driving offence in 17 years no previous offences, or points the odd parking ticket.

I was slightly overloaded by 180kg on axle 1 but on axle 2 it was 2.6 ton.

I wasn't aware of no bent chassis or smoke coming from tyres or bouncing chassis. I drove for 160 (3 hours) miles without any problems and was going a bit slow to be safe around 45-50 mph.

What is the likely outcome? Can you go to jail for overloading. What's in my best interest to plead guilty?

Have you dealt with anyone going to prison for overloading a truck?

[HandyAndy]

What is the likely outcome? Can you go to jail for overloading. What's in my best interest to plead guilty?

Have you dealt with anyone going to prison for overloading a truck?

The answers to those questions are the same as you got when you posed them elsewhere. You don't seem to have much of a defence so pleading guilty is in your best interests. The outcome will be three points and a (very) hefty fine. No, you can't go to prison.

[pipsaholic]

Well, I'm asking here everyone has a different opinion even lawyers. Those who havent been there or been convicted in the same way best taking advice like a pinch of salt rather than bible. You dont know the full story the story is from the prosecuting side not defence side. The fine system works based on income, yes the lower court can refer it to the crown or supreme court.

[HandyAndy]

Well, I'm asking here everyone has a different opinion even lawyers.

You asked what the likely outcome would be. Provided you plead guilty, I told you the only possible outcome; there is none other that is reasonably likely to happen. Your own description of the offence indicates you will be found guilty if you choose to go to trial. You cannot go to prison for the offence, no matter how many times you commit it or how serious any individual offence may be. It's simply not possible under the law. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact. There are practicing lawyers who post on one of the other sites you have posted your problem and none of them seem to disagree. If you have heard differently from lawyers, as suggested elsewhere, you need to change your lawyer.

yes the lower court can refer it to the crown or supreme court.

No it cannot. The matter is "summary only" meaning it can only be dealt with, to a conclusion, in the Magistrates' Court. The only time it can progress to the Crown Court is if you appeal against either your conviction or sentence (or both) that was handed down by the magistrates' court. If you do the case will be heard anew before a Judge and two magistrates (from a different one to that which convicted you). That would be the very end of the line. Such a case will go nowhere near the High Court, the Court of Appeal or the supreme Court. These, again, are facts, not opinion.

[pipsaholic]

My defences are.

It was a rented vehicle, not my own, so didn't know a lot about the vehicle.
I have documentation to prove i was to collect approx 2 tons of items (I was unware of 1750kg payload capacity)
I genuinely thought a 3.5t taillift vehicle could hold approx 3.5t
I genuinely didnt understand payload nor was it highlited to me in writing or verbally
I genuinely didnt know there was limits to each axle, nor was it highlited to me in writing or verbally
I genuinely didnt know there was payload plates on the vehicle nor was it highlighted to me (do people know their car payload capacity without your car manual or do car salesman highlight it no)
I didn't load the vehicle it was a team of 10 non english speaking people
My instructions to stop loading till i check if the vehicle is safe by driving it around the loading bay was ignored as they said they are in command and are professionals.
I did check the vehicle was safe by driving in a circle in the loading bay, which drove as if it was empty slightly heavier as expected.
My instructions to place certain loads and certain positions were ignored they were non english speaking.
I stopped at a nearby service station to do my checks my tyres psi and load was secured and suspension ok, i purchased ad blue and screenwash to ensure my vehicle was top performing and safe.
I drove in the 1st slow lane of a triple carriageway around 40-50 mph in a 60/70mph zone
I drove 160 miles (3hrs.05mins) without any issues
I engaged with the police in a progessive manner rather than being restrictive as I believed i was legal
I engaged and arranged excess load to be removed before reweighing my vehicle to the legal limit.
I caused no harm or injury to anyone.
I have genuine remose for what happen and will not do it again.
I'm a carer who is dependent on a person on 16 hours of oxygen and an autistic individual who have regular doctors/hospital appointments this would cause severe hardship if I were to receive a ban or prison.

[HandyAndy]

None of the above provides you with a viable defence to the charge. As the driver, you were responsible for ensuring the vehicle was not overloaded. The idea that others were in control will not wash. Stating you drove 160 miles whilst severely overloaded certainly does mitigate the offence. On teh contrary it l aggravates it considerably. If you were under duress from the people at the loading site to take the vehicle away, you could have done so and stopped when you were a safe enough distance away and ended the trip there (perhaps at the service station you mentioned). You would have still been guilty of the offence but you would have good mitigation to lessen the penalty. It's no use saying "what would I have done from there?" That's a problem for you to solve and solving it by driving 160 miles will not sway the court in any way. All you've done is aggravated the offence by driving so far. Whether you caused harm or injury is irrelevant. It would have aggravated the offence if you had but does not mitigate it because you didn't.

I'm a carer who is dependent on a person on 16 hours of oxygen and an autistic individual who have regular doctors/hospital appointments this would cause severe hardship if I were to receive a ban or prison.

I think you have been told at least four times in various places that you cannot go to prison for the offence under any circumstances and it is extremely unlikely that a ban will be imposed. What you should realise is that a second of these "overweight" offences within three years of this one will see you disqualified. This is separate from the normal "totting up" bans (12 points within three years) and is specifically for these offences. You have no right to argue "exceptional hardship" against such a ban (it is only available for normal "totting up" bans).

[islandgirl]

Here are the guidelines - you get credit for a guilty plea

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...ng_axle_weight

[pipsaholic]

We all agree this luton box was 90% overloaded looks like it doesnt it?

[Manxman]

We all agree this luton box was 90% overloaded looks like it doesnt it?

No, you're wrong and the point you try to make is irrelevant.

What we do all agree on (except you apparently) is that it doesn't matter what it looks like. The only things that matters are how much it weighs and how it's distributed.