Tacho infringements -hgv drivers

Quinny_2

Firstly, don't bother with a Tack Track, they're old hat. Invest in a Drivers Hour Guard instead.

http://www.techno-solutions.co.uk/zen/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1&zenid=hpg5nv1no9c66hk9pudj8u3au4

However.....

Because the digi tach will take 1 minute from you every time you move an inch, any aftermarket timer is virtually useless, because you would be forever switching it over when you started/stopped, so these timers should only be used as a guide.

Secondly, I'm surprised that the rozzers were able to distinguish offences on a digi tach because they don'y know they're !!!! from they're elbow in many cases. And in case anyone wonders what the hell I am on about, my b-i-l is a traffic cop in South Tyneside, and if he stops any truck driver, he gets VOSA in.

And before any remarks "What the hell is he on about?" I am a Class 1 driver of 14 years, and have been in transport since the age of 11, some 34 years ago.

mrbadexample

JoolzS wrote: »

- my DH once had six tacho infringements and got fined £600 and, IIRC, 3 or 6 points on his "normal" driving licence.

He didn't get the points for tachograph offences. They're not endorsable.

mrbadexample

farmerboy wrote: »

The punishment will depend on the severity and regularity or the offences. I.e. a couple of minutes over the driving time, and the odd daily rest error may not get to big of a fine, but regular 1/2 hours over time and insufficent daily rests on regular occasions should expect not to be driving HGV's for a while if ever again.

This is extremely unlikely. A court can neither revoke the vocational entitlement, nor endorse a car licence for tachograph offences.

In serious cases, the defendant may be called for a disciplinary hearing with the Traffic Commissioner, who could take action against the vocational licence only. It could, for example, be revoked for a few weeks. Given the information supplied thus far, it doesn't sound serious enough to warrant a disciplinary hearing. That doesn't mean it can't happen, but usually in these cases the fine from the magistrates is considered sufficient penalty.

mrbadexample

livalicious wrote: »

Therefore I am unable to give you an exact printout or breakdown of his infringements.

There should be a list of the offences for which he is being prosecuted with the summons.

livalicious wrote: »

He does have 9 infringements for being a few minutes (no more than 3 minutes) out on his rest breaks.

Can you check this to see exactly what it says, as there is a specific difference between a break and a rest? Rest is what the driver has at night (or day if he works nights) the 9 or 11 hours. Breaks are the 45 minutes after 4½ hours driving (can be split into 15 minimum & 30 minimum). I'm guessing we're talking about breaks, as 3 minutes short on a rest of 9 hours would not be enough to warrant prosecution. Even prosecuting 3 minutes short of a 45 minute break seems a bit harsh, to be honest. Incidentally, 9 offences out of how many days? Out of 10, it's not good, out of 100 it's not so bad. Might be worth mentioning in court if the numbers are in your favour.

livalicious wrote: »

And 1 infringement for exceeding the driving time allowed. The one I mentioned before about being on a Monday but saying he has not taken his 11 daily hour rest, is because he drove for 10hours 39 minutes, which he did explain to the policeman was because he was in London on that day, stuck in rush hour traffic, and because of the sheer volume of traffic meant it took him longer to find a place to park up for the night.

This doesn't quite add up. Is the summons for exceeding 10 hours driving, or for failing to take sufficient daily rest? There are 24 hours in a day, so it is possible to drive for 11 hours, and still have 11 hours rest. It is also possible that he has committed both offences. With regards to the 11 hour rest, you say it was a Monday. Was he entitled to reduce to 9 hours, or had he reduced his daily rest three times already that week (week starts when he finishes a weekly rest period). If he could legitimately have taken 9 hours, their offence may be incorrect and worth challenging.

With regards to the 10hrs 39 minutes driving, I see he was stuck in London. Obviously, if he's driving a 44 tonne artic, he can't just pull over and park up for the night. The drivers' hours regulations do permit deviation from the rules (in this case 10 hours maximum daily driving) in order to reach a safe place to park. The legislation doesn't say by how much you can extend the driving time. I think 39 minutes might be pushing it, but if he can show he stopped at the first available opportunity, or that he was stuck in abnormally heavy traffic / accident etc. he might be granted some leniency. Obviously, if he got stuck in the London traffic, and drove to Reading to take his rest, he hasn't got much to say for himself.

He will almost certainly be looking at a financial penalty, I'm afraid, and it's not easy to predict how that will work out. For example, the magistrates might impose a penalty of £50 (or £100, or £150 etc.) for each of the 9 break infringements. Or they might say £300 (or £400, or £600 etc.) for the first offence, and no separate penalty for the rest. Add on another penalty for the rest/driving offence, court costs and £15 victim surcharge, and he could be looking at anything from £500-£3000. His finances will be taken into account. Don't worry, he won't be looking at the maximum penalties unless he's rather well orf.

Was your husband given a copy of the data from the digital tachograph?

fredboris

My dad got done the year before last along with several others from his company for tacho offences.
For 10 minor tacho offences he was fined £50 per offence plus costs, any of the drivers with more than 10 offences had more severe penalties from large fines to license suspensions.
Who is bringing the case, the police or vosa?

livalicious

Thanks for your responses, im assuming its the police as it was a policeman who stopped him and checked his tacho, but VOSA were there too.

Im not able to give a breakdown of the infringements, because he gave all the paperwork (court summons, police statement, etc) to his boss for his solicitor to look over. Though the solicitor probably wont be able to help him much, he is not covered so the advice would probably be basic, like, "get yourself a solicitor sir!".

As he works away during the week, I probably wont get hold of the paperwork until he comes back the weekend, and I might scan it on Monday and copy it on here. He did say though that he would probably have to give a graph of the times he started and finished everyday, took his rest breaks etc, or give an explanation for each offence for it to make sense??

Please excuse me if what I have said thus far has'nt made much sense or added up, its a bit difficult trying to convey what he says and whats been said on here back to him. I dont have the faintest idea about tacho offenses and driver's hours, so thank you for bearing with me.

Can anyone please recommend a good solicitor who knows about tacho regulations and offences.

mrbadexample

livalicious wrote: »

Please excuse me if what I have said thus far has'nt made much sense or added up, its a bit difficult trying to convey what he says and whats been said on here back to him. I dont have the faintest idea about tacho offenses and driver's hours, so thank you for bearing with me.

Could you get him to read my post and reply on here at the weekend? To be honest, it doesn't sound like there's much to defend, apart from possibly the daily rest & exceeding 10 hours driving. You may find it's not cost effective to use a solicitor if he intends to plead guilty to all offences. We just need a bit more information first.

livalicious

Wont be able to do this weekend, but he's off on Monday, so will definitely respond then!

He will be needing a solicitor however, his boss (after consulting with his solicitor) has told him to send off his response to the summons (which needs to be done within 7 days of receipt) and plead not guilty. On the basis that the policeman's statement has some discrepancies, and at least 1 infringement is questionable.

This makes me a bit nervous, because he's had no time to really sit down with a solicitor (other than the basic advice from his bosses solicitor who he is not covered by) to advise him properly. The summons came on Wednesday, he only opened it on Friday, spoke to his boss on Saturday, and then had to send it off today. He's the one who has to face the music, but im feeling ever so "stressurized"!

Quinny_2

Is he a member of URTU or any of the other useless transport unions?

If he is, and his subs are up to date, then they must be the first port of call for legal advice.

livalicious

No he's not a member of any transport union, useless or otherwise (that made me chuckle).