PETROL STORED IN PIT

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23537, 15 January 1942, Page 3

PETROL STORED IN PIT

GARAGE PROPRIETOR FINED THREE BREACHES OF REGULATIONS Three charges of storing petrol not in accordance with the Dangerous Goods By-law and the Dangerous Goods Regulations were admitted by Alexander John - garage proprietor, in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morninfe.~-’FtTT* , i •ffelendatfi was fined amounts tSftaßJhg X IST a™* on each charge was- ordered to costs. No order was made for forfeiture of the petrol. Mr J. W. Huggins, chief inspector of the City Council, prosecuted, and Mr A. F. Wright represented Archibald. Mr E. C. Levvey, S.M., was on the Bench. The charges were:—(l) Storing more than eight and a half gallons of motor, spirit without a written licence, being contrary to section II of the Dangerous Goods By-law, 1928, of the Christchurch City Council; (2) storing dangerous goods not in a depot defined by, or in compliance with, the Dangerous Goods Regulations. 1928; and (3) storing five 44gallon drums of motor-spirit without a trade name and not labelled in accordance with the Dangerous Goods Regulations. ’ The defendant, a service station and garage proprietor with large premises in Oxford terrace, had a business, which included the selling of petrol and oil, the servicing and garaging of motor-cars, the hiring out of rental cars, and the buying and selling of second-hand cars, Mr Huggins said. When an inspector visited the premises on December 30 last, he found about 220 gallons of petrol stored in drums in a repair pit, covered with loose boards, over the top of which were packed second-hand cars. The defendant had no licence for storage. Dealing with the second charge—of incorrect storage—Mr Huggins said that in an emergency it would have been most difficult to remove the petrol. In fact, when the petrol was taken out of the pit, by order, a crane had to be used. The drums were not labelled correctly, and some, containing petrol, were actually labelled lubricating oil. This was not only misleading to inspectors, but also to firemen and others who would have to handle it in an emergency. If the charges had been brought under the Dangerous Goods Act, as well they might have been, the Magistrate would have had no option but to make an order for the forfeiture of the petrol, but as it was the Court could exercise its discretionary powers and do as it thought fit, Mr Huggins said. “Extenuating Circumstances” The facts were much as the prosecution had stated, Mr Wright said, but there were extenuating circumstances: when the restrictions were placed on petrol several persons, including two doctors, had sent coupons to the defendant, asking him to store petrol for them until such time as it was convenient for them to collect it. The petrol could with only a little alteration, have been stored in accordance with the regulations, but it was expected to be there only a short time, and the storage was only of a temporary nature. It was true there were many cars in the garage; and 880 gallons of petrol could have been stored in those cars, and the defendant would have committed no offence, Mr Wright continued. It was certainly not a case of a man deliberately flouting the law’. It was an exceedingly dangerous thing to do, and the seriousness of the offence was shown by the severity of the penalties, the Magistrate said. On the first charge a fine of £lO was imposed, and on the other two charges £5 each, with costs, but when Mr Wright explained that the first and second charges were the result of the 'one offence, the Magistrate altered the fine of £5 on the second charge to an order for costs only. John M. Scott (Mr K. G. Archer) pleaded guilty to a charge of storing on December 17, motor-spirit without a written licence. Mr Huggins said this was the case of a man storing petrol foi the Christmas holidays. It was not as serious as the previous ease. When the inspector called, investigating a complaint, he found 12 gallons of petrol, four gallons more than allowed by the regulations.