hello everybody,
my first ever post is to issue a warning about a jobsworth copper who would appear to be the re-incarnation of west midlands polices’ angry angus.he seems to be specifically targeting drivers of adr loads!! this guy is so eager to make peoples life a misery that our driver said he was moving between THREE cabs at the same time 
one of our guys had the misfortune last week of being detained for over an hour and a half whilst jobsworth went over his paperwork with the proverbial fine tooth comb, telling him that the paperwork was not legal, made him write out a breakdown of his load i.e chemical name u.n number and packing class etc he then had to further break that down in to weights for each individial transport class. our paperwork and load manifest already detail this but mr jobsworth says this is still not legal, all i can say on this is that it has now been passed on to our dgsa for clarification!!
one interesting point is that throughout this mr jobsworth was at pains to point out that he was a dgsa, however some digging by someone in the know turns up that mr jobsworths’ dgsa may have in fact expired.
i know there is not a lot to be gained by pointing this out to the copper because this would be a first failure in the "attitude: test and would no doubt lead to jobsworth pulling out a freshed talced pair of examination gloves!! 
basically this a warning to anyone running the A1 through weatherby and particualrly anybody planning on stopping at those services
diesel dave in reading this if you want any clarification drop me a p.m
many thanks
dave
bet that the same copper who told my partners brother that it’s illegal too carry ibc’s with the taps or bungs facing into the centre of the trailer a couple of weeks ago but let him off with a warning this time. he said he told his boss about it but aint heard a cheep since so maybe our resident adr guru mr dieseldave can shed some light on it?
He must have had a day out at South Mimms then cos I got pulled there for an ADR check, made me get all my kit out etc etc.
As for the paperwork, he would have waited a long time for me to list it out, it’s not my job! if the muppets that wrote the paperwork out haven’t done there job right the trailer can stay where it is.
As for taps in or taps out there is nothing in ADR regs to say which way round they have to be, they can be upside down as long as they don’t leak and are strapped to the trailer
i’m trying to be offensive, but there are some real numpties driving lorries.
they’ll do anything a copper tells them.
if he isn’t happy, then fine, let the courts decide what’s legal, and what’s not.
he’ll soon bugger off to annoy someone else.
You really have to watch the checkpoint at Wetherby not just for ADR, one of my former colleagues got pulled in the van, VOSA man said 2 tyres below 1.6 mm, so he got 3 points for one and a delayed prohibition for the other. Company successfully fought the prohibition as there was over 2mm all the way round & across the whole width of BOTH tyres. Driver was left to his own devices though 
. And he would have passed the attitude test, one of the nicest bloke you’ll have the pleasure of meeting, the only time I’ve seen him angry was the day he’d been stitched up.
vwgpmk2:
As for taps in or taps out there is nothing in ADR regs to say which way round they have to be, they can be upside down as long as they don’t leak and are strapped to the trailer
thats what i thought but wasnt sure
scotstrucker:
vwgpmk2:
As for taps in or taps out there is nothing in ADR regs to say which way round they have to be, they can be upside down as long as they don’t leak and are strapped to the trailerthats what i thought but wasnt sure
Hi scotstrucker,
I agree with vwgpmk2, but it seems sensible to load IBCs for liquids with the taps in an accessible position.
Lettiesdad:
… one interesting point is that throughout this mr jobsworth was at pains to point out that he was a dgsa, however some digging by someone in the know turns up that mr jobsworths’ dgsa may have in fact expired.
Hi Lettiesdad,
If the policeman reckons he’s got the power to require a driver to ‘correct’ his own ADR transport document, he really is making stuff up as he goes along.
The responsibility for providing a correct transport document rests squarely with the sender (consignor) of the goods.
The procedure for this ‘problem’ is that the driver informs his boss (the ‘carrier’) that there’s a problem.
Then the carrier informs the consignor that the job has stopped until a correct transport document is on board the vehicle. The carrier has a duty to ensure that a correct transport document is on board the vehicle, but it ISN’T the carrier’s (or driver’s) responsibility to provide it.
I say ADR 1.4.2, but I’d love to know where the policeman got his idea from.
MADBAZ:
You really have to watch the checkpoint at Wetherby not just for ADR, one of my former colleagues got pulled in the van, VOSA man said 2 tyres below 1.6 mm, so he got 3 points for one and a delayed prohibition for the other. Company successfully fought the prohibition as there was over 2mm all the way round & across the whole width of BOTH tyres.assuming it was a vehicle over 3.5 tonne, the legal limit is 1mm accross the central 3/4 of the tread. so that VOSA bloke need’s a newarsehole tearing and a vosa refresher course…
philgor:
MADBAZ:
You really have to watch the checkpoint at Wetherby not just for ADR, one of my former colleagues got pulled in the van, VOSA man said 2 tyres below 1.6 mm, so he got 3 points for one and a delayed prohibition for the other. Company successfully fought the prohibition as there was over 2mm all the way round & across the whole width of BOTH tyres.assuming it was a vehicle over 3.5 tonne, the legal limit is 1mm accross the central 3/4 of the tread. so that VOSA bloke need’s a newarsehole tearing and a vosa refresher course…
It was 3500 MAM so car rules apply, a minimum of 1.6mm in a continuous band throughout the central three-quarters of the tread width, throughout the whole of the circumference, as oppose to over 3500 MAM which is: a minimum of a least 1 mm throughout a continuous band measuring at least three-quarters of the breadth of the tread and round the entire outer circumference of the tyre.
I kow what your saying, and the same applies to my ex-companies compliance team, you’d have thought they’d fight my colleagues corner. What they actually did is shoot themselves in the foot, cos everything that wasn’t quite legal, such as a headlight out required a fitter to come out 
, and you should’ve seen the stink that was caused when someone refused to drive a courtesy car back to the workshop that had a bald tyre.
http://www.motinfo.gov.uk/htdocs/m4s04000107.htm
the above is what ALL class 1,2,3,4,5 and 7 mot tester’s use. these are the people who test your vehicle’s at garage’s like ■■■■■■■ etc, vosa test hgv,pcv and big stuff that won’t fit on the the equipment and the garage’s
1,2 are bike’s, 3 are three wheelers’ under 450kg. 4 is car’s up to 3000, 5 are 8 to 16 seater’s and class 7’s are 3000 to 3500kgs’
most tyre’s that have these wear bar’s arn’t set at 1.6mm, more like 2mm so if the vosa bloke just look at the tyre and gv9’d (is it a gv9?) there and then my comment about the vosa bloke still stand’s, (well in fact all of them could do with that 
) as i’m assuming that was the case here…