AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

A I know of no specific requirements with regard to the

6th April 1989, Page 68
6th April 1989
Page 68
Page 69
Page 68, 6th April 1989 — A I know of no specific requirements with regard to the
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?

checking of tachographs except in the context of the EEC Regulations 3520/85 Article 15 (1) and (2) — (2) says: "The undertaking shall make periodic checks to ensure the provisions of these two regulations (3820/85 and 3821/85) have been complied with. If breaches are found to have occurred, the undertaking shall take appropriate steps to prevent their repetition."

Then there are the undertakings given in the application or renewal for an operators licence that the undertaking would make proper arrangement for ensuring that Part VI of the Transport Act 1968 (as amended), which deals with drivers' hours and records, will be complied with.

Neither of these two requirements actually stipulates a specific number or frequency of tachograph checks. In a recent case Lord Justice Woolf and Mr Justice Hutchinson concluded: "A company which at the very least shut its eyes to the fact that an employee was notfilling in his tachographs could not be said to have caused the employee not to use the vehicle recording equipment contrary to Section 97 (1) of the Transport Act 1968".

This decision I believe dealt with the specific charge of "causing and permitting an infringement of tachograph regulation".

I do not believe that this decision would allow the "Mens Rea" (guilty knowledge) of "falsification" to be included and, indeed, it would be foolish of any operator to believe that he could walk free if there was evidence of the company conspiring or aiding and abetting.

If you check the tachographs of each driver say 10 times a month for any problems, ensuring that you have not given them a workload that allows them to say "I had no chance of doing the job in the hours I had and if I had protested I would be up the road", then I would say that you have discharged your obligations.

However, I do not sit in judgement and it is evident that Licensing Authorities believe to a great degree that your responsibility is absolute.

Many operators use outside agencies for tachograph analysis, which is commendable as it is an extra operating cost, and I should think that that would more than fulfil the obligations.

However, you may be judged not on what you do to analyse but on what you have done about the results.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus