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
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196 
LORRY BAN BLUES
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The story headlined "Exel warned 0-licence at risk" (CM 11-17 Jan) highlights the absurdity that is the London lorry ban. Indeed, if ever a top 10 were compiled of "The law being made to look an ass" the London Boroughs' Transport Scheme's stupidity and affront to justice would be a clear winner.
Operators have to use roads covered by the ban— soon we may be forced to use these roads only at night! A bureaucratic jungle produces the convictions; not any flagrant abuse.
Some time ago I was convicted of a breach and fined £10 by clearly sympathetic magistrates. I was advised to appeal. Not wanting to waste my time and money, I didn't bother. In my case, they alleged I had an expired permit. For a week, every single night, LBTS spotters observed that my vehicle, "without a valid permit", used a road to a Heathrow Industrial estate—a road we still legitimately travel nightly (we used it for years before too!).
Our conviction benefits not a single resident: the road didn't even have an LBTS warning sign. It didn't matter! The LBTS law says: "The authority may erect warning signs". Note that it doesn't say it must.
In court the LBTS officials produced an A4 photocopy of their London map, as "evidence" of my having been advised of London's restricted roads! Just imagine the outcry if the ordinary motorist was prosecuted for driving the wrong way in a one-way street, without any warning signs to indicate the lawful direction.
Like all things to do with lorries, the idiots who thought up and perpetuate this madness believe we only operate vehicles to cause annoyance to the public. Obviously we operators enjoy paying for the outrageously priced fuel needed to cause this irritation—it's not a question of our vehicles servicing Britain's needs!
As things stand, operators are liable to be prosecuted, even if our drivers ignore specific instructions regarding their route. This has to be wrong. Exel, I invite you, I urge you, to fight. When I last highlighted the problem in CM, I appealed to operators for an "enough is enough" action list. Exel first, please.
David Holmes, Managing director, Holmes of Heathrow, Ashford, Middx.