AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Broken-down vehicles: 4

10th November 1979, Page 146
10th November 1979
Page 146
Page 146, 10th November 1979 — Broken-down vehicles: 4
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?

by Les 0Idridge, T. Eng (CEI), MIMI, AMIRTE IN THE LAST article on this subject the definition of "recovery vehicle' contained in the regulations concerning the use of trade plates was examined, and the various forms such a vehicle could take was discussed. The tractive unit of an artic without modification or which is not carrying or towing special equipment does not fall within the definition and cannot legally be used for towing a broken-down vehicle with trade plates. There is, of course, nothing against using such a vehicle if it is licensed.

A breakdown vehicle may only be used with trade plates for the recovery of a "disabled vehicle". It was held in Robinson v Crew (1977) RTR 141 that disabled vehicles are vehicles which suffer from disability other than having had the rotor arm removed. Regulation 35(4)(1) of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 1 971 state that a recovery vehicle with trade plates may be used:

(i) for proceeding to or returning from a place where assistance is to be, or has been, rendered to a disabled vehicle (ii) for proceeding to or returning from a place where it is to be, or has been, held available for rendering assistance to a disabled vehicle, or (iii) for carrying a disabled vehicle, or for towing such a vehicle (whether with the assistance of a trailer or not) from the place where it has broken down or from such other place where it is subsequently for the time being situated to a place for repair or storage or breaking up.

It will be seen that the Regulations cover the circumstances where a breakdown lorry is sent to the scene of an incident but on its arrival its services are not required. The vehicle need not be towed back. to a workshop for repairs; the Regulations permit the use of "plates" for taking a vehicle to a scrap merchant or to a place for storage.

With a few exceptions, the carriage of goods in a vehicle operating under a trade licence is not permitted. One of the exceptions to this general rule is contained in Regulation 38 of Registration and Licensing Regulations which allows a recovery vehicle to carry a disabled vehicle and/or articles required for the operation of the crane or jacks or for dealing with the disabled vehicle. The question is often asked: "Can tools or spare parts to be fitted to the broken down vehicle be carried?" Tools can, I think, be carried, but how much in the way of replacement parts can be taken along is open to some doubt. To take two extreme cases, it would be improper, I think, to take a replacement engine; while carrying a spare fuel pump to fit to the vehicle may not be objected to. Nevertheless, until there is a stated case on this aspect of the law it is not possible to give an authoritative .answer.

The carriage of passengers in vehicles used with "trade plates" is dealt with in Regulation 40. The Regulation permits the carriage of the driver (who must be the holder of the licence or his employee) and any other employee whose "presence on the vehicle is necessary for the purpose for which the vehicle is being used". This covers the crew of the wrecker and in addition the Regulations permit the carriage of any person in a dis

abled vehicle being towed. When a broken-down vehicle is being towed it would seem safer to carry the driver and his mate in the breakdown lorry instead of in the towed vehicle, but the Regulations do not permit this.

Turning to psv, Regulation 135 of the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1978 forbids the towing of a trailer by a public-service vehicle. It then goes on to make some exceptions to this rule, among them the drawing of one empty public-service vehicle by another public-service vehicle "in the case of emergency". As far as I am aware it has never been decided if recovering a broken-down public-service vehicle is an "emergency"! but I am inclined to think it would be.

Regulation 133 of the same Regulations states that no trailer shall be used for the conveyance of passengers for hire or reward, but an exception is made for a trailer, being either a brokendown vehicle or a trailer carrying a broken-down vehicle being drawn in consequence of the breakdown providing: (a) the trailer is not drawn at a speed in excess of 30mph (b) where the trailer is, or is carrying, a broken-down motor vehicle constructed or adapted to carry more than seven passengers exclusive of the driver or any other broken-down motor vehicle carrying more than eight passengers, it is attached to the drawing vehicle by a rigid drawbar. Recovery work is by its v nature hazardous and extra c and a high degree of expertis necessary, especially with he, vehicles which have been volved in collisions. Regulat 97 of the Motor Vehicles (C struction and Use) Regulatii 1978 must be constantly bo in mind by recovery vehi crews. This is the Regulat which says, in effect, tha vehicle, its trailer, and any pi or accessories, and the lo must at all times be maintaii in such conditions that danger is caused or is likely tc caused to any person on vehicle or on the road. If ,attachment of the broken-do vehicle to the recovery vehicl not carried out in a proper m ner so that there is a possib of it breaking away or if swinging so as to cause dan to other road users this is Regulation which would used by the prosecution to br those responsible before court.

A later part of the sa Regulation makes it an offe to use a motor vehicle or tra for a purpose for which it is unsuitable as to cause or likely to cause danger or r sance to any person in or on vehicle or trailer or on a road, take an extreme case to Musti this point, if a Land-Rover v used to tow a 30-ton eiƧ wheeler and danger v caused, as it probably would then an offence against 1 Regulation would be comr ted.

In Hunter v Towers (19, 115 JP 117 a breakdown lc was towing a.vehicle by me, of a suspended tow. Not I than 20 per cent of the weigh the lorry (transmitted throi the cable and jib of the cra was borne by the break& vehicle, the two parts being apart by a rigid towbar. It v held that as no part of the k was superimposed on breakdown vehicle, the 1 vehicles together did not c stitute an articulated vehicle.