Asking Drivers to Pay for Damage

[eddie_snax]

whelmic:
I had a freelance driver in my truck last week. It has come back with a shattered mirror casing and mudguard missing. Probably about £300 of damage in total, so not enough to warrant a insurance claim, but definetly enough to put a big dent into the profit margin for the job. The driver has admitted fault, apparently he got to close to a bank while driving along a country road. Is it reasonable to ask him to pay for the damage?

Where I work, they get in quite a lot off agency Drivers, and any damage is billed to the agency, I suppose that’s the benefit off using agency as opposed to 1 man freelancer, it probably costs more to use an agency, but they have it as part off the contracts with the agencies used, that damage will be billed

You could always ask for a contribution to the cost, and if He wants work with you again he might chuck you 100 notes, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the answer is no

[scannyfanny]

Roymondo:
Accident damage bonuses can be a useful tool. But they can also be a double-edged sword if they form a significant part of the drivers’ regular income, as there can be a temptation to not report minor damage, or even to conceal it. This is especially true if the trucks don’t always have the same driver.

This is very true. Personally I think the ‘accident-free bonuses’ that work best are those in the £10-25 per week sort of range. Not a huge a amount but a pain and certainly more noticeable if you as a driver have just lost that amount for 8-10 weeks on the trot. Damage the truck 5 times in a year and you never saw the bonus that year!

This kind of policy can only be applied when the drivers/gaffers work the daily defect reporting correctly and honestly and the business knows the condition of their vehicles individually on a daily or worst case weekly basis for trampers. It can be difficult to administer when not one man/one truck or when lots of agency drivers used. However, let’s be honest that’s when your most damage occurs anyway…when no one driver has ownership of that vehicle and actually cares about it.

Transc:
I’m down to one truck and two trailers now,I drive it myself and do very little damage simply because I am the one who has to pay for it and have the hassle of repairing it etc,so I am careful and don’t make careless mistakes! I deliver to construction sites and windfarms everyday and the risks of damaging the unit and trailer are very high.

Up until 12 years ago I was a partner in a business running 14 trucks,a mixture of artics and 8w tippers,most of the work was delivering to construction sites and the amount of careless damage was ridiculous. I’m talking about damaged lights,steps,bumpers,crash barriers,tyres/rims,damaging landing gear from not dropping loaded trailers properly etc,all caused by carelessness .Mirrors are going to get damaged at some stage or other as overhanging trees and bushes are an unavoidable problem.

The amount of careless damage got so bad that my weekends were spend repairng lights,bumpers, steps etc,I was driving nearly full time myself and going to the same places as the drivers but not doing any damage. I’m not claiming to be a better driver than anyone else but I am far more careful simply because I’d rather spend my wekends having a life than fixing damaged trucks and trailers,plus the cost of repairs eats into the profit that is marginal as it is.

My solution was to put a note in every drivers wage packet stating that any damage caused to the truck or trailer by carlessness on their part would be deducted from their wages over an agreed amount of time depending on the cost. If a vehicle was damaged on a site by an excavator,crane etc then it was the drivers responsibility to get the foreman to sign for the damage,they wouldn’t always pay but it took the blame off the driver. They had the option to accept this or leave,none of them left.

The result was, that from that day on very little damage was done! One or two drivers continued to do careless damage and when the cost was deducted from their wages they soon learned. Why should any driver that is getting a decent and fair rate of pay think they can damage vehicles and walk away without any consequenses? Sure it’s going to happen from time to time,we’ve all done it,everyone makes mistakes but when it happens regulary then the only way to make a driver more careful is to deduct it from his pay,if he or she doesn’t like it then I’m sorry but they can go and damage someone else’s equipment,simple as that!

Couldn’t agree more with your comments.

Like your anti-damage policy! Nicely done. Just makes guys think for half a second before hashing onto a bay or a site.

[3stepsaheaduk]

I went for an interview for a class two job when I first passed last year got offered the job there and then said sign here for umbrella etc and working contract. I noticed it said any damage you agree to pay then it was blank I asked how much I had to pay they said they didn’t no until they rang insurance company but said it will be ok shouldnt be more than 1000 I said cheers anyway and walked

[weeto]

Transc:

The Sarge:
You want to charge me for damage to your truck if I make a mistake? Then yes - I will leave. You want me to come and fix your central heating too??

I’m talking about damage caused by carelessness,if you read my post you’ll see that I say everyone makes mistakes,that’s just life,I’m talking about continuous needless damage caused by a ‘who cares? I don’t have to pay for it attitude’ and there are plenty of drivers with that attitude! Of course their are good drivers who take care and do little damage,but sadly they are not in the majority.

If you came to fix my central heating and carelessly damaged the boiler,would I have to pay for that too■■?

You would be daft to keep some one in a job who has that “who cares” attitude, but some companies struggle to get drivers , so keep them on!!

[eddie_snax]

Transc:
,and yes driving can be stressful and hard,but put yourself in the shoes of the man that has to pay for careless damage,he can’t walk away at the end of his shift and go home to his family and know that when he comes back to work the vehicle will be fixed and ready to go,he has to organise the repair (small operators will do a lot of that themselves in the evenings or weekends) and pay for it,eating away at the vehicles income.

So maybe look at it from the owners perspective for a change…

I see what you’re saying, and am not unsympathetic to the issues from the employers side, but I’ve had a bad run in the last 12 months, I’ve had My first insurance claim for 13 years, then had to have a repair to the my trucks bumper(a road work truck knocked several cones into the live lane only yards ahead off Me causing damage), and I recently smashed My n/s mirrors as well, again in road works. No one is more aggrieved at these events than Me, but I would walk if asked to contribute to any repair. I know for a fact that I month on month return higher than fleet average mileage(230000kms in 18mths) = higher revenue. I do any early starts (1-2am’s) or late finishes as when required without complaining, unlike many others. I’m always in the top 10-15% on the fuel returns, and always end weeks on 89hrs+ fornightly driving, (I do have a photo on my phone showing 89.59hrs driving).

So from my perspective, though there has been a higher than acceptable level of damage(which is also goes against my previous good record)which is what I think, I believe that my performance with regard to revenue, fuel and flexibility should wipe the slate clean with regard to any penalty being levied against Me, and as I said earlier I would walk if asked to contribute

So maybe look at it from the drivers perspective for a change

[hotel_magnum]

instead of bonuses and other inducements to reduce truck damage, why not take out driver negligence insurance, a fixed rate for the year, and if the same driver causes most damage the insurer will not renew cover for that driver, so the driver that loses a set of mirrors (which may not be his fault) is not tarred with the same brush as one that comes back every week with damage.

[juddian]

Similar to Eddie Snax’s post, every time i complete the road works section of the M1 between 16 and 19 without at the very least having a mirror removed i’m amazed.

Johnny Foreigner touched the drivers mirror as he cruised down the middle lane last week, i’m nearly on the grass beside the hard shoulder so short of going down the embankment not a lot i can do when JF’s on a mission…if he’d removed it for me…A, the chances are he won’t stop and B…i’ve got more chance of ■■■■■■■ in the queens handbag than him admitting liability, and less chance than that of my company recovering the costs involved.

So exactly what do you expect your drivers to do, the odd bit of damage is part and parcel of the industry, if you use monkeys who couldn’t give a toss you know what you’ll get, but you only need to spend an hour with most drivers to suss out what they are so no need for monkeys unless you’re paying peanuts.

Hotel Magnum is going the right way, i’ve always said that a vocational drivers insurance claim history should be digitally attached to the vocational licence, that would stop the usual suspects flitting from place to place leaving a trail of destruction in their wake unbeknown to the next victims, its in everyone’s best interests except the useless.

[eddie_snax]

Juddian:
Similar to Eddie Snax’s post, every time i complete the road works section of the M1 between 16 and 19 without at the very least having a mirror removed i’m amazed.

Johnny Foreigner touched the drivers mirror as he cruised down the middle lane last week, i’m nearly on the grass beside the hard shoulder so short of going down the embankment not a lot i can do when JF’s on a mission…

So exactly what do you expect your drivers to do, the odd bit of damage is part and parcel of the industry,.

Try the A1 at Elkesley, and were do you go when the sign is as good as on top the cones, and in this case Mr tipper is on your righthand side, in his 6’6" wide 8 wheel tipper ■■■■ happens.

Juddian:
Johnny Foreigner touched the drivers mirror as he cruised down the middle lane last week, i’m nearly on the grass beside the hard shoulder so short of going down the embankment not a lot i can do when JF’s on a mission…if he’d removed it for me…A, the chances are he won’t stop and B…i’ve got more chance of ■■■■■■■ in the queens handbag than him admitting liability, and less chance than that of my company recovering the costs involved.
.

That’s a joke, about 7 yrs ago, a truck belonging to the firm I was working for, got struck in Thurrock services, Me and the driver of our truck had stopped there for a brew, I was parked on his N/S, Lithuanian truck comes cutting round the O/S and swipes out the o/s mirrors and grilles corner panel etc, done £800 off damage. Despite the police being involved at the foreigners request, our boss never got that claim settled. Norwich Union stopped chasing it after about a year and a half, I know this because I filled out witness statements 3 times, from diferent collection agencies. What really got up the bosses nose was, that his excess was about £500, as he said for an extra £300 he would have settled it without his premiums going up

Juddian:
Hotel Magnum is going the right way, i’ve always said that a vocational drivers insurance claim history should be digitally attached to the vocational licence, that would stop the usual suspects flitting from place to place leaving a trail of destruction in their wake unbeknown to the next victims, its in everyone’s best interests except the useless.

What would help, to stop the usual suspects flitting from place to place leaving a trail of destruction in their wake unbeknown to the next victims, is if you were allowed to be honest on a reference. Not being an employer, so I have this on hear say, but I’m lead to believe that you cannot give a negative reference, only positive or neutral. If this is the case then that is scandalless

See, I do have sympathy with the employers perspective

[juddian]

‘’'What would help, to stop the usual suspects flitting from place to place leaving a trail of destruction in their wake unbeknown to the next victims, is if you were allowed to be honest on a reference. Not being an employer, so I have this on hear say, but I’m lead to believe that you cannot give a negative reference, only positive or neutral. If this is the case then that is scandalless

See, I do have sympathy with the employers perspective ‘’’

Eddie,
You’d think it would be in employers/business interests wouldn’t you, but out in the real world other forces are at work.

Not quite the same but i did some agency work (yeah i know) a few years ago, and got sent to a now ‘gone up the wall and good riddance’ haulier in Corby, had blue and white knackered lorries.
When it came time to pay the bill they welched, which ■■■■■■ me off big time cos when i work for someone i give them 100% every bloody time, not bothered what anyone else does or didn’t do but my work i take a pride in.

Anyway, talking to the agency bod i asked if they would tell other local agencies that company A were non payers of the worse sort, no he said, hopefully other agencies would work for them and get crapped on from an equally high tree, no doubt the same attitude would come from the other agencies.

Unbelievable but there you are, the British disease in all its glory Lowest Common Denominator Rules, they’d rather help a non payer keep his pockets full than see them avoided for everyone’s benefit.

[roymondo]

There is no reason why a “negative” reference cannot be given - Provided it is factual. Of course, a lot of firms won’t give such a reference because of the possibility (and expense) of defending against legal proceedings.

gov.uk/work-reference for details.

[alix776]

Juddian:
Depends how he hires himself out i’d have thought, billing you properly as a self employed driver (one man agency) he should be charging enough to cover his own insurance.

On the other hand if he’s a temp bum on seat you’re paying a typical days wages to then IMO you’ve employed him for the day with all the risks associated.

Stupidest coment so far as a self employed driver cannot insure a vehicle themselves that they are going to drive. If this was the case se drivers would he charging 500 - 1000 per day to cover accidental damage. And please don’t anyone mention damage waiver insurance. That agencies want you to get. That is why you have vehicle insurance. From the sounds of it you sent the truck into an usuitable area there for you take the risk

[roymondo]

alix776:

Juddian:
Depends how he hires himself out i’d have thought, billing you properly as a self employed driver (one man agency) he should be charging enough to cover his own insurance.

On the other hand if he’s a temp bum on seat you’re paying a typical days wages to then IMO you’ve employed him for the day with all the risks associated.

Stupidest coment so far as a self employed driver cannot insure a vehicle themselves that they are going to drive.

No, I think yours qualifies for that award. The insurance being talked about here is not motor insurance, it is Professional Indemnity insurance, which covers the self employed business against claims for negligence etc.

[alix776]

That’s what is a con the operator sent a truck in to a high risk area .

So that’s the customers risk not the drivers.

Indemnity waiver insurance has only come about thanks to agencies. Its not required or need legally. And I make sure my clients are aware of this no I don’t have it and never will. This type of insurance started off as many agencies were ripping airlines etc off.

[roymondo]

It may or may not be a con - but it isn’t motor insurance and self-employed drivers can get it to cover themselves against negligence claims. Which was my point.