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 
We must get our act together
Page 10
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
For a number of reasons there was no real consultation over 'problem' trailers now, hopefully, there will be transitional protection
YOUNG MAN driving a heavy goods vehicle was stopped by two police officers who asked to see his tachograph. It appeared to them that there was a "gap" in the record which suggested, apparently, a little fuse pulling had been going on.
The young man kept his cool: "I know nothing about it," he said. The officers kept their cool .. . "Handcuff him to the steering wheel," said one officer to the other. "We are going to lock you up over the weekend until we have completed our inquiries." "Well," said the young man, "there are one or two little problems with the chart.'
This story is true and, in fact, recent. I do not know whether or not I should admire the officers; certainly I do have a sneaking admiration for them. The threat was, of course, absolutely improper, but, equally, had they not acted so quickly the offences would have probably remained undetected.
At the end of the day my view must be that we must support the prosecution of drivers who, for whatever reason, falsify or manipulate their records. The law is clear. If you have a good reason for, say, exceeding your hours of driving, then you should make a note of the reason on the chart. Every time a driver falsifies a record he damages not only his, and his employer's, record; he also gives more ammunition to those who oppose the haulage industry.
On the other hand, we have just been asked to act for a company which was, apparently, found to have a train overload, the weighing have been carried out on a dynamic weighbridge. The company wrote a clear letter explaining how the overload came to occur; it had, clearly on the facts, been given information that was marginally inaccurate. Inevitably, the response was a summons.
The "overload" was 3.18% before you discount the 150kg tolerance on each of the six axles of the vehicle. Another brilliant act of cynicism by a prosecuting authority. Let us all hope that the efforts of the Road Haulage Association to persuade government to understand the problems of loading meet with some Success.
A
My intention this month is to talk about trailer lengths, but, before I do that, a little tale about British Telecom. The administration manager of a company that makes extensive use of "answerphones" was minded to replace the existing system which had simply aged. The logical first step seemed to be to contact BT. After some discussion the first contact was reluctantly persuaded to part with the appropriate phone number. This turned out to be the number of a finance company, which is apparently the leasing arm of BT.
My friend explained that the company wanted to look into the purchase or lease of new equipment. The BT person offered to send a service engineer. "No," said my friend. "we do not want a service engineer, we want to buy new equipment.'
BT insisted that the service engineer was appropriate and the initial charge for the "call out" would be £34. "How about a 'rep'?" There was some discussion at BT at the end of which my friend was advised that BT does not have 'reps'. The correct procedure is to go to your nearest BT shop. Not a bad way to do business . .. unless, of course, you actually want to make the sale.
The Heavy Transport Association, of which I have written before, has been concerned by the proposed alteration to permitted vehicle lengths. Once again the process of consultation has not worked as it should. The problem seems to lie between the consumer and the Department of Transport in the particular case although I continue to feel that, as an industry, we should do more to get our act together.
The initial problem really arose because of the technical advances with refrigerated and temperature controlled vehicles. 11 is, as most will know, difficult to bring them in within the present limitations. The manufacturers and users of that equipment have an impressive voice and they were, properly, party to the discussions. A problem was recognised with abnormal load equipment, but, for a number of reasons, there was no real consultation. The proposal was to limit the length of dual-purpose combinations to 18 metres which, on the face of it, appeared to be acceptable.
We received the consultation paper with little time to consult the HTA membership and, although the Department of Transport extended the return period, they were under pressure to gel the amended regulations tabled and we could rot respond within the proposed limit. There is a substantial problem with many dual-purpose trailers. A low-loader tri-axle trailer with a well length of 2411 is going to come out at about 19.5 metres. The market for these trailers is comparatively new, and many companies have purchased this type of equipment far too recently to be able to absorb the effective loss of use that would follow the arrival of the new regulations. We did, with the assistance of the HTA members, lodge a paper with the Department setting out the concern that was felt, and the Department responded by offering us the opportunity of a meeting. I am delighted to report that, as a result both of the positive assistance of the Department of Transport and of the happy coincidence of a need to make a further amendment to the regulations, it seems probable that the position of those with these "problem" trailers will be acknowledged and that there will be a transitional protection.
While acknowledging the considerable support of King Trailers, I must record my own concern about the fact that the manufacturers appear, once again, to have allowed the vision of a new market to cause them to forget those who had purchased expensive equipment so recently.
We are not beyond criticism. The response to the consultation document was slow; indeed, as 1 have said, much is owed to the goodwill of the Department of Transport. 1 suspect that many operators see consultation documents as being something that should concern only the large operators and manufacturers. I am sure that many believe that nothing will be achieved by taking part in the consultation process and so do nothing.
You cannot complain if you do not contribute. In fact, consultation can be an effective means of putting forward a point. It is, in my view, unreal to expect any government department to know every aspect of business even if it is within the ambit of that department. Conversely, if we use the consultation procedure, then we are entitled to complain if our voice is ignored. This month's message: If invited to take part in consultation, take part.