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 
Test diversion time allowabli
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DRIVERS diverted up to five miles to have their vehicles tested should be able to add the tir taken to their working day without breaking British or Common Market law.
This Government promise — not a firm pledge — was made in the Lords last week when Tories, with independent support, failed by one vote to remove the five-mile provision from the Transport Bill.
The voting for and against was equal — 76 — and so the bid to make the change failed.
For the Government, Lady Stedman admitted that driving and duty time involved in the diversion of vehicles to weighbridges or testing stations could cause difficulties to drivers whose vehicles were not breaking the law if they were unable to reach their destinations within the drivers' hours or duty time.
This situation was not dealt with in either EEC regulations or the 1968 Transport Act, but the Government thought both could be interpreted as allowing the driver to exceed the limits in circumstances of this kind.
Lady Stedman understood that enforcement authorities agreed in practice that such circumstances should be taken into account when considering whether a driver had infringed hours rules.
At present drivers who had been diverted would, ask the enforcement officer to note in the logbook that they had been diverted and give the time involved.
If the driver was subsequently stopped, then the time taken by the diversion would normally be taken into account in the calculation of his driving time and his duty time.
The police might make inquiries to ensure the logbook annotation was genuine, but there was no reason why this practice should change when the proposed new rules on permissible distance for diversions came into force.
Lord Lucas of Chilworth said that five miles as the crow flies was more likely to be an effective 15 to 17 miles, which could add £7 to £8 to a trip.
He suggested a greater use of roadside checking devic and if these suggested ti something was wrong then full test could be applied.
The Government had tall about guidance to examinf and he wondered why sor thing could not be written i the Bill.
Supporting him, Lord N tistone told of an experien transport operator who received a GV9 when a s■ check on the road for. something wrong witl. vehicle.
This had been issued at 1 and related to one tyre wl did not have sufficient tr and maladjusted brakes.
The affected trailer was five miles away from the c pany's nearest depot, so it taken there and presented clearance at a nearby tes station at 4pm.
They were informed that station only cleared GV9! Tuesdays and Fridays, though it was a Tuesday the time this information been given it was after o'clock and the station finished for the day.
As a result the firm h; vehicle which could no used for three days.
But Lady Stedman said diversions were not likel increase the time off the r by more than half an hour There would be additi costs but these should operations to be carriec with safety.