AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

in CM'S recent "Know the law" article concerning projecting loads,

22nd November 1968
Page 69
Page 69, 22nd November 1968 — in CM'S recent "Know the law" article concerning projecting loads,
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?

the section relating to rearward projections of between 6ft and 10ft gives the impression that only one marker board is required, marking the rearward-facing end of the load. The article refers specifically to the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Ilse) Regulations 1966, 8th Schedule, but in my copy of the regulations, paragraph 3(b) of the 8th Schedule states that "three surfaces shall be exhibited"---one conforming to the standard end-marker triangle and two to the standard side-marker triangle.

Would you clarify the position?

AOur correspondent Mr. L. J. Oldridge

states that the section of the 8th Schedule of the 1966 C and. U Regulations to which you refer has been amended by the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No 2) Regulations 1968.

The amendment provides that the condition in paragraph 3(b) shall not apply, so far it relates to side projection surfaces, by reason only that a vehicle has a special appliance or apparatus,or is carrying a load, which has a rearward projection exceeding 6ft in length but not exceeding 10ft in length.

Hence on this detail a forward projection is now treated differently from a rearward projection, the former exceeding 6ft but not 10ft, still requiring three marker boards.

The number of the amending Statutory Instrument is 426, and it is available from

Tags

People: L. J. Oldridge

comments powered by Disqus