Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Not bullshine and not second hand either, he is the drivers rep at Hacklings, driving a 26t to a delivery point in a 7.5t restriction and because he didn’t go back out the way he came in got fined.
Stephenjp:
Not bullshine and not second hand either, he is the drivers rep at Hacklings, driving a 26t to a delivery point in a 7.5t restriction and because he didn’t go back out the way he came in got fined.
Pretty much secondhand by definition then. Unless you were there and saw/heard what happened, it’s just his account of what he did and why he got a fine. My experiences of “drivers’ reps” suggests many of them have a tendency to flights of fancy - almost as much as some CPC trainers. I think they do it to confirm their position in the view of other drivers as being widely experienced.
Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Not bullshine and not second hand either, he is the drivers rep at Hacklings, driving a 26t to a delivery point in a 7.5t restriction and because he didn’t go back out the way he came in got fined.
If his only offence was contravening a single weight restriction he should have taken the case to court where the case would almost certainly have been dropped.
Having said that, I agree with Roymondo that in-spite of what you’ve been told it probably never happened
Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Another favourite is the assertion that you must take the shortest route. Again, it is simply not true.
Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk
“to access to and egress from any premises which are situated adjacent to that length of road to proceed and to return from the said premises along the same route”
Source: kirklees.gov.uk/beta/transp … -order.pdf
Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Not bullshine and not second hand either, he is the drivers rep at Hacklings, driving a 26t to a delivery point in a 7.5t restriction and because he didn’t go back out the way he came in got fined.
Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Another favourite is the assertion that you must take the shortest route. Again, it is simply not true.
Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk
“to access to and egress from any premises which are situated adjacent to that length of road to proceed and to return from the said premises along the same route”
Source: kirklees.gov.uk/beta/transp … -order.pdf
Should have claimed exemption under para (e) instead of (g)
"for or in connection with the conveyance of goods to or from any
premises on or adjacent to that length of road, or any other road
accessible from and only from that length of road; "
Stephenjp:
Also, if you do go through a weight restriction, you must go out the way you went in, I know someone who didn’t and got fined by the plods waiting at the other end!!!
That has a distinct flavour of MMTM or RDC bullshine. There is no legal basis for it as the offence is committed by proceeding into the weight restriction without it being necessary in order to access premises (or for loading, depending on the signs). There is nothing in any legislation requiring you to use the same route out again.
Another favourite is the assertion that you must take the shortest route. Again, it is simply not true.
Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk
“to access to and egress from any premises which are situated adjacent to that length of road to proceed and to return from the said premises along the same route”
Source: kirklees.gov.uk/beta/transp … -order.pdf
From the same document:
“(e) for or in connection with the conveyance of goods to or from any
premises on or adjacent to that length of road, or any other road
accessible from and only from that length of road;”
the maoster:
^^^^ I doubt that they object to the local bin wagon emptying their bins either. I also can’t see them complaining when Blue watch come hooning along to extinguish their thatched roofs either.
Yes a full bin wagon is 32t over 3 axles also roads don’t sink because of heavy vehicles (only) but because the ground underneath the surface is eroded away (I watched a video on youtube on the subject that makes me an expert so take my word for it)
Whilst Checking to see if a well known route with weight limit except for access also said about in snd out the same way, it doesn’t look like it is But also found that within that weight limit, is a weak bridge with a short section of rd about to have an absolute weight limit without access.
Yeah…my memory is a bit hazy on that one. I seem to remember the computer display thing on the inside that tells the driver how much load there is (you’re supposed to stop collecting before a certain point; in fact it will automatically deactivate the bin lifters when close to max weight)
I know 3 axles and 32t doesn’t sound road legal but trust my faded memory from years ago - it’s how it is!!
Not a silly question…as a new driver I was on here searching for the same thing! It would be much more helpful if the restriction sign said 7.5t restriction in 500yards rather than except for access so you knew if you were delivering in 250yards you were ok. Found a brilliant Freight Map for Derbyshire by DCC so why can a Freight Map UK not be made?.. would keep lots of “jobsworths” occupied for ages! PS If there is already such a thing please let me know
Regarding 7.5T, dont forget it’s the rated weight of the unit not its actual weight. So for example, a 9T artic solo can’t go over an 18T bridge even if its under weight technically at that moment.
As for bin wagons, Dennis and Merc with 3 axles (inc front one) are 26T. Our council does have one with 4 axles which I believe are higher rated but not sure what off hand (I work for a different one).
Yes they do have a weight display in the cab or at least ours do. If it says 36T then a lot of things have gone wrong.
trevHCS:
Regarding 7.5T, dont forget it’s the rated weight of the unit not its actual weight. So for example, a 9T artic solo can’t go over an 18T bridge even if its under weight technically at that moment.
.
What weight limit would a 6x2 solo qualify for? Only 44T■■? [emoji51]
trevHCS:
Regarding 7.5T, dont forget it’s the rated weight of the unit not its actual weight. So for example, a 9T artic solo can’t go over an 18T bridge even if its under weight technically at that moment.
.
What weight limit would a 6x2 solo qualify for? Only 44T■■? [emoji51]
What is printed in the relevant section on the VTG6?
As a driver you really do need to be familiar with certain key information on the Ministry Plate - how else will you know if the vehicle you have been given to drive has been “downplated”?
A solo 6x2 tractor unit, as with any three-axle goods vehicle, cannot normally have gross weight higher than 26T, but it may well be less than that depending on type of suspension and distance between axles.
Roymondo:
As a driver you really do need to be familiar with certain key information on the Ministry Plate - how else will you know if the vehicle you have been given to drive has been “downplated”?
A solo 6x2 tractor unit, as with any three-axle goods vehicle, cannot normally have gross weight higher than 26T, but it may well be less than that depending on type of suspension and distance between axles.
Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk
And, there can be tax advantage to down-plating a vehicle.
A tractor unit designed for 44t or more and typically operated at such, could be plated at maybe 28t, and so pay less road fund. assets.publishing.service.gov.u … le-tax.pdf
Two trucks and trailers, identical (except for paperwork), could pass down the same road, one legal, one not.
Roymondo:
As a driver you really do need to be familiar with certain key information on the Ministry Plate - how else will you know if the vehicle you have been given to drive has been “downplated”?
A solo 6x2 tractor unit, as with any three-axle goods vehicle, cannot normally have gross weight higher than 26T, but it may well be less than that depending on type of suspension and distance between axles.
Sent from my SM-A226B using Tapatalk
Ok thanks.
That’s just mad though, I get that the unit has all this gross weight capability for the fifth wheel, but without a trailer, there’s literally no reasonable scope for loading a unit to it’s gross weight
No need to take a vehicle to a weigh-bridge there and then. Photograph, cross check against vehicle reg etc…the fine is in the post.
Yep, an empty tractor can be smaller and lighter than a freighted 4 wheel rigid, but thems the rules.
Only information I care about is height and widght the rest idc I just crack on thru anything only expection being Is London and posh areas as they have nothing better to do
