Who should maintain a company vehicle

Kilty_2

I am responsible for our fleet of pool cars when I am on duty at work and the level of negligence I witness is unreal. Not just the drivers that don't care - the other people that should be checking things don't care either

We have a very young fleet yet it is abused and I'll feel very sorry for people that think that a 4 year old diesel Fiesta is a bargain.

marlot

SHIPSHAPE wrote: »

...even the sump nut could have come free and disharged all the oil on a long motorway journey....

Much more likely that the vehicle simply consumed the oil - most engines gradually use oil - a little bit escapes past the piston rings, and past the oil stem seals. Indeed some cars can use serval litres between services from new.

SHIPSHAPE wrote: »

The question posed is an employment contractual issue and it should be in the employment section.

I agree. Car enthusiasts on here can't understand someone who van't be bothered to check the oil, because they know the consequnces (blown engines!). But that doesn't mean there is an employment obligation - that depends on so many other factors. I think this thread needs to be moved to the employment section.

celtus

Root cause of damage to engine=Management for failing to implement a system of checks...'commen sense' for the driver to check oil levels.

mustrum_ridcully

celtus wrote: »

Root cause of damage to engine=Management for failing to implement a system of checks...'commen sense' for the driver to check oil levels.

Have a read of what the highway code says about vehicle checks.

The attitude you've just shown is why this country is upto its eyeballs in redtape and form filling - because people aren't big enough to take responsiblity for their own (in)actions. However in this case there is no "but nobody told me" excuse, the HC has already advised drivers on what checks they should/must do - so there should be no need for management to implement form filling. If a driver doesn't do these checks anyway then perhaps they aren't fit to be driving for a company?

Notmyrealname

SHIPSHAPE wrote: »

And you wouldn't get fined by VOSA for a blown bulb if you knew nothing of it, it could have happened just a minute beforehand.

Sorry, I've more experience of VOSA checkpoints than you are likely to ever have. They can and they do in the absence of a daily check sheet.

Notmyrealname

marlot wrote: »

I agree. Car enthusiasts on here can't understand someone who van't be bothered to check the oil, because they know the consequnces (blown engines!). But that doesn't mean there is an employment obligation - that depends on so many other factors. I think this thread needs to be moved to the employment section.

I wasn't posting as a car enthusiast. I was posting as a lorry driver and what is expected as a person driving a vehicle as part of their job not only by an employer but also VOSA.

celtus

Commen sense does not work in the legal world, as i personnaly know someone who tripped whilst getting out of a LGV and sucsessfully sued his employers for thousands of pounds, long term sick ect ect, as he proved in court he had not been givin any formal training with regards to access and egressing a vehicle, his employers said basically that its commen sence and that "everyone knows how to safely exit a vehicle") Bottom line though...he Won (yes it was his own fault, as he climbed out of the vehicle whilst moving)...but he used the system against them.

No, im not sticking up fro the guy that failed to check his oil ect, just pointing out that its not as black and white as people portray.

(The system stinks, its run by parasites, too much big brother (1984) , everyone scarred to death of the sueing culture now that is rife...fed up....and we're all slaves to the system) Food prices going up almost weekly....but apart from that everying is ok

mustrum_ridcully

celtus wrote: »

Commen sense does not work in the legal world, as i personnaly know someone who tripped whilst getting out of a LGV and sucsessfully sued his employers for thousands of pounds, long term sick ect ect, as he proved in court he had not been givin any formal training with regards to access and egressing a vehicle, his employers said basically that its commen sence and that "everyone knows how to safely exit a vehicle") Bottom line though...he Won (yes it was his own fault, as he climbed out of the vehicle whilst moving)...but he used the system against them.

No, im not sticking up fro the guy that failed to check his oil ect, just pointing out that its not as black and white as people portray.

(The system stinks, its run by parasites, too much big brother (1984) , everyone scarred to death of the sueing culture now that is rife...fed up....and we're all slaves to the system) Food prices going up almost weekly....but apart from that everying is ok

I get where you're coming from but daily/weekly checks are covered by the highway code and have been for a fair while. So can be considered as fundamental knowledge any driver should have.

SHIPSHAPE

Notmyrealname wrote: »

Sorry, I've more experience of VOSA checkpoints than you are likely to ever have. They can and they do in the absence of a daily check sheet.

You don't know why the vehicle in question has lost its' oil from what has been posted so why do keep babbling on about VOSA?

Good grief man!

SHIPSHAPE

mustrum_ridcully wrote: »

I get where you're coming from but daily/weekly checks are covered by the highway code and have been for a fair while. So can be considered as fundamental knowledge any driver should have.

The Highway Code is advisory, not legally binding.

And it is not illegal to drive about with no oil, if you are daft enough to do so.