AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Operators refuse to hush trucks

14th April 1988, Page 6
14th April 1988
Page 6
Page 7
Page 6, 14th April 1988 — Operators refuse to hush trucks
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?

• More than 20 Freight Transport Association operators have decided to say "no" to new London lorry ban permit conditions being imposed by the London Boroughs Transport Committee.

"Following FTA advice," says the association, "a number of members have lodged appeals in particular those requiring the fitting of air brake exhaust silencers."

"Members are being asked to modify their vehicles," says FTA south eastern regional director John Guttridge, "and we're not sure that that is a good idea." The trucks involved all comply with UK and European Community construction and use regulations, says Guttridge in support of his members' defiance. In addition, he warns, the operators' own engineering standards and past experience tells them that fitting air brake silencers will not necessarily improve noise emissions and could reduce the vehicle's safety levels.

"Our contention is that the LBTC has no power to have existing contruction and use regulations modified," says Guttridge, and the association is adamant that it will give its members as much support and advice as they need to push their revolt through the LBTC appeal system.

The FTA says that it is "also concerned that the supremacy of national vehicle construction rules be upheld, otherwise individual local authorities throughout Europe could be free to introduce their own rules regarding vehicle design".

Several of the operators involved in the appeals run huge fleets and are among the country's biggest own-account hauliers. They say that fitting extra components to their trucks — such as air brake exhaust silencers — will not be prohibitively expensive as much as irritating. They fundamentally disagree with the principles involved. No appeal has yet been heard by an LBTC appeal hearing, but several earlier cases have been settled "out of court".

"The LBTC keeps redefining what they are looking for," says Guttridge, "because in certain cases where hauliers have appealed on the grounds that the modifications or alterations are neither approved nor recommended by the vehicle manufacturer, the LBTC has given way." The London Boroughs have effectively let operators off the hook where they have been able to prove that the relevant truck manu facturer disapproves of the air brake exhaust silencer.

Factions within the London Boroughs Transport Scheme are confusing the ban's muddied waters even further. A letter which has been sent out by LBTS to the Department of Transport says that a consortium of boroughs led by Bromley is refusing to do what the DTp requests and alter their traffic signs and traffic orders to a 17-tonne threshold. It is thought that the boroughs involved are Bromley, Bexley, Croydon, Merton and Sutton in the south of London.

Ten boroughs want to drop out of the lorry ban. They argue that re-signing their streets or re-drafting their traffic orders is a waste of money. Only 22 "hard core" boroughs look like sticking with the ban.

The London Borough of Richmond is leading the faction which endorses increasing the weight threshold for the ban from 16.5-tonnes to 17-tonnes.

Both the ETA and the Road Haulage Association are warning members that uprating 16tonners to 17-tormers will bring their vehicles within the scope of the lorry ban for the first time, and that at this stage defending any truck caught in this trap could be very difficult. 0 The LBTC is taking haulier Stephen M Howlett to court today (Thursday 14 April) in Stratford, east London, allegedly for breaking the ban. This is the first operator the LBTC has prosecuted under the ban, following last month's successful prosecution by Camden.


comments powered by Disqus