AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Why are we still waiting?

29th May 2008, Page 28
29th May 2008
Page 28
Page 29
Page 28, 29th May 2008 — Why are we still waiting?
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Changes to the 0-licence system were proposed two years ago, but most of the measures have still to take place. What's the reason for the hold up?

Words: Pat Hagan For an industry that prides itself on being able to move things swiftly and efficiently. changes in road transport law often happen embarrassingly slowly.

It's more than two years since the Department for Transport (DfT) first came up with a proposed overhaul of the 0-licensing regulations that would have major repercussions for hauliers across the UK.

The idea was to streamline what many regarded as an unwieldy structure that bogged operators down in unnecessary red tape and bureaucracy. The backbone of the initiative was to allocate every operator a single 'lead' Traffic Commissioner, who would take charge of supervising their fleet.

Electronic surveillance

It was a universally popular proposal that would have eased the pressure on operators thanks to the allocation of that single 'lead' TC, rather than having to apply to separate Traffic Area Offices every time they wanted to make the slightest change to 0-licence specifications.

This measure took effect on 1 August last year despite some lingering concerns over whether or not operators had any choice over who their lead commissioner would be.

Yet other crucial elements of the package, including scrapping the 0-licence disc displayed in vehicles in favour of electronic surveillance, abolishing the 28-day grace period operators enjoy before they have to notify Traffic Area Offices of changes to fleets and revamping the fee structure, have proved to be rather less straightforward to implement. Under the initial plans, the DfT had expected the restructured fee system to take effect more than a year ago. But now it looks like it could be this October at the earliest before the new structure is in place.

"It's taken longer than anybody thought it would," says Sally Thornley, head of compliance information services at the Freight Transport Association (FTA).

"It has certainly dragged on a bit. The first thing to sort out is the fees, and that's not as simple as it sounds. But we should expect new fees to be in place towards the end of the year."

Central to the new fee system is a proposal to scrap individual vehicle specification charges.

As things stand, an operator pays his five-yearly 0-licence fees, then also coughs up a fee for every single vehicle specified on his licence.

Test fees

This amounts to an annual charge of £48 per truck, or £36 per truck if the fees are paid for five years up front.

So, every time a haulier adds a new truck it means paying Vosa. Yet because hauliers are already paying Vosa for annual test fees, it's clear there is an opportunity for reducing red tape by combining the two systems.

The plan is to do away with individual specification fees and 'absorb' them into the annual test fee. The stumbling block to this has been reaching agreement over what those new test fees should be set at.

At the moment, a whole host of factors — from the number of axles on a vehicle to the time of day when it is tested — can dictate what an operator pays. But there are 28 different variables, ranging from £49 to £137.

"There will probably be winners and losers," says Thomley. "For example, a small number of specialist companies who might be exempt from 0-licence regulations would have to pay the higher test fee."

However, new fees are not the only sticking point. Following strong lobbying from the industry, it seems the proposal to abolish the 28-day grace period may also come under review.

Under the current system, operators have 28 days before they have to notify the authorities of any vehicle they are using on their 'margin' — the gap between the number of trucks they are authorised to use under their 0-licence and the number they actually have in their fleet. Any operator worth his salt will try to ensure there is always a significant margin, to allow for sudden expansion of its fleet without jeopardising the terms of the 0-licence.

In the past, the 28-day grace period has provided a valuable breathing space for firms that suddenly need to hire in trucks for large jobs, or whose businesses expanded very quickly. Yet there have been a number of concerns raised that the system has also been open to abuse, allowing operators to run hired vehicles, for example, for weeks at a time without having to notify any traffic offices or pay any fees.

The DfT plan was to have no grace period whatsoever, forcing operators to notify traffic area staff as soon as any new vehicle is in use.

In return, there would be an end to the bureaucratic system of sending out green discs through the post to display in truck windscreens.

With Vosa having to send out tens of thousands of these a year, some of which get lost or damaged in the mail, this can be quite a burden.

In its place is to be a system of electronic supervision, whereby Vosa enforcement officers can use computers to cheek if a truck is specified on an 0-licence, rather than carrying out a visual check for the disc.

Time ticks by

The majority of those in the industry seem to support the principle of the idea. But the total abolition of the grace period has raised concerns. "The response from our members was that they supported the abolition of the 28-day period, provided there was still a reasonable grace period of around 72 hours," says Thornley.

"One reason is that many operators now use the TAN computer system to update their details online. But the staff that are probably doing that are likely to only be in the office during the week and not available 24/7."

For example, if an operator takes possession of a new vehicle on a Friday before a Bank Holiday weekend, it could be at least 72 hours before staff are available to update details via TAN.

But with no grace period at all, that operator would be operating illegally until the details could be updated.

With this issue still to be resolved and a fee structure to be finalised, the wheels of change are likely to carry on grinding away... slowly.

As Thornley says: -It's a case of 'watch this space'." • Further information: To read the original DfT 0-licence proposals, go `.o www.dft.gov.uk click on 'Consultations', then Archived Consultations' and then 'Streamlined regulatory system for operators of goods and public service vehicle


comments powered by Disqus