the maoster:
Early on in my career I learned never to stick my head above the parapet and to never draw unnecessary attention to myself. This scenario is a no brainer, just put the bloody card in and be done with it.
Yes, card will be in just in case.
A bit like my missus, we only use slot 2 about once a year, and that involves less argument than this thread 
stevieboy308:
stu675:
Noremac:
[.If not taking advantage of the multi-manning rules, there is nothing obligating the passenger to insert a card in slot 2 at any time.
The passenger could conceivably take over the driving and insert his/her card at that time and cover the activities so far with a manual entry. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I would add that you can insert your card if you want and you can even put it in slot 2 of a vehicle you are not licensed to drive.
I guess that’s how my company (£Billions) operates. It’s always a 2 man crew. The 2nd man could be a driver (but there is never any intention that he will drive that day) AFAIK the 2nd driver never inserts in slot 2 (not sure if it is forbidden by the company or just common practice).
I’ve not researched it any further because I am never the 2nd man.
N.b. the default POA for the 2nd slot would not be correct as they are always doing other work. (They always do a manual entry before the end of the shift)Hope they don’t get stopped then, £300 fpn for not having your card in when you should
If they are carrying out other work as a passenger when the vehicle is moving, then the correct thing to do is do a printout to correct the mode used and it is not a reason not to put your card in.
Can you not choose the mode for slot 2?
Does slot 2 default to rest to follow slot 1?
Sorry, hadn’t read to the end when I posted. Post above should really be the end [emoji1787]
Depends how your paid
if your on job and knock get him to put his card in you won’t need to stop just swap cards and crack on finish a good 45 mins early
No need to use card. Legally he is a drivers mate. Its just like coach driving route learning. I remember being route trained and there were 8 of us. The one who was driving is the one whose card was in
stu675:
stevieboy308:
stu675:
Noremac:
[.If not taking advantage of the multi-manning rules, there is nothing obligating the passenger to insert a card in slot 2 at any time.
The passenger could conceivably take over the driving and insert his/her card at that time and cover the activities so far with a manual entry. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
I would add that you can insert your card if you want and you can even put it in slot 2 of a vehicle you are not licensed to drive.
I guess that’s how my company (£Billions) operates. It’s always a 2 man crew. The 2nd man could be a driver (but there is never any intention that he will drive that day) AFAIK the 2nd driver never inserts in slot 2 (not sure if it is forbidden by the company or just common practice).
I’ve not researched it any further because I am never the 2nd man.
N.b. the default POA for the 2nd slot would not be correct as they are always doing other work. (They always do a manual entry before the end of the shift)Hope they don’t get stopped then, £300 fpn for not having your card in when you should
If they are carrying out other work as a passenger when the vehicle is moving, then the correct thing to do is do a printout to correct the mode used and it is not a reason not to put your card in.
Can you not choose the mode for slot 2?
Does slot 2 default to rest to follow slot 1?Sorry, hadn’t read to the end when I posted. Post above should really be the end [emoji1787]
When the vehicle is moving slot 2 on all Digi Tachos will default to poa and can’t be changed, so if you are doing work as a 2nd driver whilst the vehicle is moving your only legal option is to then do a printout and record your other work on that, as legally you couldn’t use that as a reason not to put your card in and do a manual entry later
idrive:
A bit like my missus, we only use slot 2 about once a year, and that involves less argument than this thread
Cracking analogy. I salute you Sir 
robthedog:
Depends how your paid
if your on job and knock get him to put his card in you won’t need to stop just swap cards and crack on finish a good 45 mins early
Most real world answer.
stevieboy308:
adam277:
Truck with 2 passengersTruck one
1 driver
1 hgv driver passenger using slot 2
1 ■■■■■■
= LegalTruck two
1 driver
2 hgv driver passengers but only one can use slot 2. And either one may feel the need to drive at some point.
=IllegalThis is your logic. It’s stupid.
Square this for me.
It’s either illegal to have two passengers who can at some point drive the truck or not. If so then it’s permissible not to use slot 2 and just do a manual entry.I honestly want to know the answer to this lol.
There is no exception in the rules due to lack of tacho slots.Edit: the fact that this question has lead to so much debate shows how stupid the current rules are. It should be clear.
If one has put their card in slot 2, then there’s nothing else you can do.
It is clear, if you’re classed as a driver you must insert your card, if there’s already 2 drivers then there’s nowhere for you to insert your card.
Come on, just like the penny dropped with your diary / logbook theory, you’ve got this, just think a little harder, I’ve got faith in you
It is the law that a person is a driver then they HAVE to have their card in but their are two passenger drivers then the law is being broken. What part dont you get 
? Regardless if there is nothing that they can do. Law is black and white. Unless you can point to an obvious exemption for driving with 2 or more fellow hgv drivers.
So, we are still in a silly example of it being completely legal to drive with an extra hgv driver and a ■■■■■■ but illegal to drive with two qualified hgv drivers in the passenger seats.
Check the source I linked of your post the DVSA were quite clear if a driver is available to drive then they must have their card in.
The penny has not dropped on the logbook theory. I have been an agency bod for a bit now and I have not seen one person use a wax chart ever to keep track of their hours. They all use a diary or some DVSA approved logbook. But I am not going to argue you about it because maybe by the letter of the law you are right. But practically speaking both drivers and the DVSA are just fine with a well kept diary/logbook.
I may actually email the DVSA about this because unless you can provide some clarity it does seem like the regs dont really cover this.
Also here is an email you quoted form the DVSA in regards to ‘needing’ the card in.
These are the questions that should be asked:
- Does the worker hold the relevant category of driving licence for the vehicle?
- Is the worker insured to driver the vehicle?
- Is driving part of their contract of employment?
So anyone who does not answer yes to either or both of 1 & 2 cannot be deemed to be a driver as they could not legally take over driving if necessary.
That’s from the DVSA so to answer the OP. He does not have to put the card in as he is not insured to drive the truck.
Source: trucknetuk.com/phpBB/viewto … 2&t=159453
Check stevieboy308 post.
Here’s Steve’s email with DVSA from the other thread from 2019 for those interested.
stevieboy308:
I know I’m right!Doing it your way you’re leaving yourself open to a £300 fine for failing to use your card.
The question has been asked and answered by the DVSAs policy department
Here is the email sent to DVSA. It’s a little expansion on the truth just to set the scene, so not quite all true
QUOTE
It seems the definition of a ‘driver’ is “any person who drives the vehicle even for a short period, or who is carried in a vehicle as part of his duties to be available for driving if necessary”. The point that interests me is the ‘AVAILABLE FOR DRIVING IF NECESSARY’.I have a customer that operates ‘bin wagons’ for commercial waste, therefore operating under 561/2006. The vehicles are more often than not crewed by two members of staff. They are both trained and qualified drivers, but when doubled crewed the 2nd man is called the ‘pusher’ and his sole purpose is to push the wheelie bins onto the rear end loader. So – when they travel their route, the passenger is constantly jumping out, loading wheelie bins etc and the driver tends to remain in the drivers seat unless there are particularly heavy bins. They normally operate as ‘pusher’ for the full week, and in most cases the vehicle ‘belongs’ to the driver and he wouldn’t let the 2nd man drive it anyway (they can be very precious about ‘their wagon’).
Initially I had both crew using the tachograph, but this created a real mess with regard to accurate records as they simply could not get the hang of selecting WORK for the 2nd man every time they stopped to load and we’d end up with large portions of POA recorded where it should be work. It doesn’t help that the digital tacho defaults to POA and stays on POA when the vehicle stops.
We tried all sorts to try and resolve it, but it was a mess. We even tried the disciplinary route. I therefore decided that the 2nd man need not insert his card. As far as I see it he is there as a labourer and has no intention of driving. His duties that day do not include driving. Therefore, the driver operates the tacho as normal for himself, but our 2nd man does not insert his card and simply keeps a time sheet for purposes of the RTWTR under which I believe he must still comply. His time sheet records his total work and total break and although travelling in the vehicle would be a POA, we record the period as work.
The crew are instructed that should any major disaster happen and should the 2nd man be forced to take control of the vehicle (driver injury etc) then at that point he would manual enter back to start of shift when he inserted his card. I believe this would ensure compliance as he would have his weekly timesheet with him to satisfy the requirements for ‘other work records’ as required under 561/2006.
However, we now have a new Transport Manager in place (freshly qualified) and although I am responsible for analysing the tacho data and generally advising them as a sub contractor, he has countered my instructions and insists the 2nd man MUST insert his card as he is ‘available for driving’. I have argued that some of the lads haven’t actually driven for months as they prefer the ‘pusher’ job but he insists. My point being they are not there to drive. Yes they are available to drive but their duties do not ordinarily include driving.
As an argument ensued and it got messy, this new Transport Manager telephoned the FTA trainer who trained him for his TM CPC and was told the 2nd man MUST insert his card as he has one and is a qualified driver carried in the vehicle, and it is this that I disagree with.
So, could you shed any light on the matter? I would rather the 2nd man didn’t use the tacho and continued with his written timesheet. Of course, if we knew he would be driving that day, then I agree his card should be inserted at the beginning of the shift and then full tacho usage, but that isn’t how we operate.
END QUOTEHere is the first reply
QUOTE
I’m afraid I am with the Transport Manager on this.Whether the driver is precious about the vehicle and would not “allow” anther crew member to drive is not relevant. Whether they have not driven for months again is not relevant. And I will also quote your own words back to you – “Yes they are available to drive”. You also refer to the intention to drive. If the Commission only wanted crew who had the intention to drive on any given day, I can assure you that would have been in the text. Instead they have chosen, quite deliberately, text which provides a much wider application of who the Regulation applies to and that is why the definition includes crew who are available to drive “if necessary”.
No-one is able to predict with 100% accuracy that a crew member will not be required to drive hence why the Regulation includes “if necessary” which takes away the requirement for a crew member to know in advance that they will drive. You have said that crew are expected to take over driving duties when required, such as “should any major disaster happen”, but inserting a driver card only at that point is not acceptable. Manual records are permitted only in limited circumstances which does not include the failure to use the tachograph when it was available for use and should have been used.
The rules cannot be properly enforced if drivers can simply say “oh I didn’t keep proper records that day as I had no intention to drive” and the Commission does consider how the rules can be enforced when drafting regulations. It has to be borne in mind that a driver’s activities on any particular day do not just impact that day, they have an effect for many weeks before and after, for example, calculations for weekly rest periods which must take into account every bit of work carried out (regardless of the type of work or employer – see Article 6(5) of EC 561/2006 and Article 34(5)(ii) of EU 165/2014).
I’m afraid that Enforcement authorities also don’t overlook legal requirements simply because drivers are not making sufficient effort to comply. Traffic Commissioners and courts take a similar dim view of excuses that the driver couldn’t remember to do something so the reasons for wanting them to keep manual records instead carry no weight.
I would also add that under The Road Transport (Working Time) Regulations 2005, people who are carried as crew as are also regarded to be mobile workers and hence are also required to comply with those working time rules instead of The Working Time Regulations 1998. This again means there is no distinction between someone who happens to drive during a shift and someone who happens not to drive during a shift. The 2005 domestic regulations are in place as a direct result of Directive 2002/15/EC (so EC law) and Directive 2002/15/EC is mentioned in the Recitals and in Articles 4 and 6 of EC 561/2006 and in the Recitals and Articles 1, 7 and 34(5) of EU 165/2014. The only reason that we have to have the domestic regulations to implement Directive 2002/15/EC is that, unlike EU Regulations, Directives are not directly applicable so must be adopted in national law to come into effect (although Member States effectively have no choice but to effect directives).
I hope that explains sufficiently how the position is viewed by the Commission and DVSA.
END QUOTEI then replied as follows
QUOTE
Thank you for your reply, although not necessarily what I wanted to hear!I just need to clarify a few points if possible. I am not meaning to argue, just trying to get a complete picture to give us options. I have also added a few comments under your comments below.
I do apologise if I seem argumentative, but this is making little sense to me and I want to make sure I understand all options. I have another customer who delivers furniture which involves 2 man crews in 7.5t vehicles. Some of the 2nd men are qualified to drive but don’t wish to, never do and wouldn’t be expected to. They renew their DCPC simply because the company provides the training and allows them to attend, plus it may benefit them if they ever leave to work elsewhere as a driver. They are only C1 via a car test prior to January 1997 holders. Five or six of them haven’t actually driven in years and when asked what their employment is they are ‘warehouse workers’ but they are qualified to drive. If asked to move the vehicle they would refuse. They are called ‘drivers mates’ and the other guy is called the driver. Surely this 2nd man, this ‘drivers mate’ would not and should not be expected to use the recording equipment?
I am just trying to make sure I fully understand this distinction between a driver and someone who could drive but isn’t ‘available’ to drive. As an extreme verging on silly example, a Transport Manager jumps in the cab with a driver just to visit the customer the driver is going to etc. He has a vocational licence, digi card and DQC – are we saying he has to insert his card? Does he become ‘available’ to drive if necessary? Or can we state that his ‘duties’ do not require him to drive?
END QUOTETo which a I received
QUOTE
These are the questions that should be asked:
- Does the worker hold the relevant category of driving licence for the vehicle?
- Is the worker insured to driver the vehicle?
- Is driving part of their contract of employment?
So anyone who does not answer yes to either or both of 1 & 2 cannot be deemed to be a driver as they could not legally take over driving if necessary.
Anyone who can answer yes to both 1 & 2 then has to then consider what they have been employed to do. If it is explicit in their contract of employment or job description that driving will never be part of their duties then they are on safe ground to say that they are not a driver as driving will never take place. If it is not absolutely clear, or there is something in their contract of employment/job description that says their employer can ask them to carry out any other reasonable tasks (in addition to their normal tasks) then there is the possibility that they may be asked and expected to drive. Clearly it would not be reasonable for an employer to ask someone to drive where it means they would be breaking the law but if they would not be breaking the law then the request could be reasonable.
I would go back to a point in your previous email – if one of the drivers was taken ill and could not drive would the warehouse worker take over?
END QUOTEI replied once again as follows
QUOTE
Thank you for the prompt reply – much appreciated and yes you have added the clarification I was seeking. It does however puzzle me that this is seemingly based on the fact they MIGHT drive, one day, maybe, perhaps.Taking myself as an example, I would definitely tell my employer I do not drive, but if some dire circumstances dictated there was nothing else could be done, I’d drive as a one off to the minimum required but I wouldn’t be happy. I am sure my contract of employment may be worded “any other tasks deemed reasonable” – who wouldn’t put that in a contract. I have no intention of ever driving again, yet I maintain my DCPC, Digital Driver Card and Medical requirements as a ‘just in case’ for employment reasons. i.e I might need a job.
So, let’s say an enforcement officer takes action against a person sitting in the passenger seat because their card was not inserted, but the officer knew he had one, even though the person insisted he was not there to drive. Perhaps a check of the card found he drove 2 months ago but not since. I would like to think that if standing in court an argument that a person hasn’t driven for weeks or months, wouldn’t ordinarily be expected to drive and on the day in question their duties did not involve and were not expected to involve driving – that would be a good mitigating defense. I think there is something wrong if not.
END QUOTEThe final reply is, I think, getting a little frustrated with me
QUOTE
I disagree as regards what is a good mitigating defence. The wording in the regulation is specifically to cover people who may occasionally drive “if necessary” and driving 2 months previous clearly shown that driving is undertaken. Anyway such matters are ultimately for the courts to take a view on when we submit such cases. I have stated what DVSA’s position is and unless I receive guidance from a court, DfT or the Commission which changes that then that is what our position shall remain.I carry out my role in consultation with DfT’s policy and legal advisors and we have a raft of information and people that we access to determine the appropriate application of the rules. I was previously a TE and I can assure I would not just take a passenger’s word for that they were simply a porter. Not being told the truth is a daily occurrence for examiners and it is integral to their job to ask searching questions and not accept at face value the first thing that is said by drivers or crew. If they accept things at face value they will fail to find offending.
END QUOTE
stevieboy308:
If he is being carried in the vehicle as part of his duties to drive it if it becomes necessary, then he is classed as a driver and needs to insert his card.Intent to drive or not is irrelevant.
If you injured yourself and couldn’t drive, would he drive or would they send someone else out to drive it back?
If he’s not insured then he can’t drive it.
However if it were me in the passenger seat, what is to be gained by not putting it in? I’d probably put it as it’d probably make things easier if stopped, it’s a £300 fpn for not inserting it when you have to, if the officer thinks you should it’s either pay the fine or go to court if you can’t convince them they are wrong.
This was my 1st reply, which is in exact agreement with the DVSAs email - “if he’s not insured then he can’t drive it”
I then go on to say if it were me I’d still put it in though, again that is saying he doesn’t need to legally.
But I also asked if the driver injured himself would they send someone else out to drive it back?
This is the point I’m arguing about and later we discuss the small chance that he does actually end up driving, if that is the case then it means he was classed as a driver all along, as that clearly meets the criteria of a driver for the 561/2006 regs, so the options are from a purely legal point of view, put your card in to be legal if you end up driving or don’t put your card in and you couldn’t legally drive so another driver would have to be sent out if the original driver could no longer drive.
Thanks for taking the time to find and post the email, saved me the job! Think that’s the 2nd time on this thread you’ve posted something up that you thinks back you up but just backs me up!! Thanks but I don’t need any help, you’re too easy as it is
Anyone wanna start a go fund me for his ■■■■■■ obsession? 
adam277:
stevieboy308:
If you meet the criteria of what is deemed a driver, again even if there’s no intention to drive, then you must insert your card, if there’s more than 1 extra driver then only 1 can obviously put their card in slot 2, so they would be the one that takes over driving if it becomes necessary,…mind blownWell firstly, its been stated that he will not be driving because he can not due to no insurance.
Secondly, in our scenario according to you we still have one driver who is not using the tacho to record work and apparently he can’t use a dairy so he is breaking the law. So it’s illegal to have 3 drivers in a truck but it’s fine to have two drivers and one ■■■■■■? (Assuming she doesn’t have a hgv license)
#mindreblownMixed Working
If drivers work within scope of the Drivers’ Hours Regulations at any time during a week they must make a record of any other work carried out in the same week. For example, a driver drives an in-scope vehicle between Monday and Thursday and will therefore have tachograph charts for each day. If on the Friday the driver does not leave the depot and works as a yard shunter, he or she must produce records for that day.The driver can provide the required record by producing:
manual records written on tachograph charts
manual records written on a printout from a digital tachograph
records made by using the manual input facility of a digital tachograph, or
a drivers’ record book for days working on the domestic drivers’ hours rules.
Now we could get into what a drivers record book is to me though it’s a diary.
Either way the plod are not going to fine you for not having your card in slot 2.
Try this one
adam277:
The penny has not dropped on the logbook theory. I have been an agency bod for a bit now and I have not seen one person use a wax chart ever to keep track of their hours. They all use a diary or some DVSA approved logbook. But I am not going to argue you about it because maybe by the letter of the law you are right. But practically speaking both drivers and the DVSA are just fine with a well kept diary/logbook.
I may actually email the DVSA about this because unless you can provide some clarity it does seem like the regs dont really cover this.
Is that enough clarity? Do you know what GB domestic hours are? Would you like me to explain that too?
adam277:
Here’s Steve’s email with DVSA from the other thread from 2019 for those interested.stevieboy308:
QUOTE
These are the questions that should be asked:
- Does the worker hold the relevant category of driving licence for the vehicle?
- Is the worker insured to drive the vehicle?
- Is driving part of their contract of employment?
So anyone who does not answer yes to either or both of 1 & 2 cannot be deemed to be a driver as they could not legally take over driving if necessary.
As he was not insured to drive he dosen’t need to put his card in . Thats what I’ve been saying all along - thanks for clearing that up again . If something happens accident / illness / injury and the company then puts him on the insurance then he can insert his card do a manual entry and continue - just as I said .
idrive:
I’m taking out a driver with me this week to show him the round before he starts work next week.
He will not be insured to drive the vehicle we will be in.
Does he need to put card in slot 2 even though there is no chance of him driving?
I find it rather strange that somebody is learning a route but not insured to drive a particular vehicle. Not knowing how many vehicles the Company has,or why somebody as a future employee is not insured,after all the Driver surely had a driving assessment in a vehicle which he was insured for. Most Companies with a team of Drivers has insurance to cover any vehicle or Driver not individual vehicles.
Another point is where is/was he working before starting with the Company,if it was as a Driver how do you know he is not maxed out on his Tacho with another Company or Agency 
Ignore me if its only my mind working overtime
beefy4605:
adam277:
Here’s Steve’s email with DVSA from the other thread from 2019 for those interested.stevieboy308:
QUOTE
These are the questions that should be asked:
- Does the worker hold the relevant category of driving licence for the vehicle?
- Is the worker insured to drive the vehicle?
- Is driving part of their contract of employment?
So anyone who does not answer yes to either or both of 1 & 2 cannot be deemed to be a driver as they could not legally take over driving if necessary.
As he was not insured to drive he dosen’t need to put his card in . Thats what I’ve been saying all along - thanks for clearing that up again . If something happens accident / illness / injury and the company then puts him on the insurance then he can insert his card do a manual entry and continue - just as I said .
Don’t cherry pick
"No-one is able to predict with 100% accuracy that a crew member will not be required to drive hence why the Regulation includes “if necessary” which takes away the requirement for a crew member to know in advance that they will drive. You have said that crew are expected to take over driving duties when required, such as “should any major disaster happen”, but inserting a driver card only at that point is not acceptable. Manual records are permitted only in limited circumstances which does not include the failure to use the tachograph when it was available for use and should have been used.
The rules cannot be properly enforced if drivers can simply say “oh I didn’t keep proper records that day as I had no intention to drive” and the Commission does consider how the rules can be enforced when drafting regulations. It has to be borne in mind that a driver’s activities on any particular day do not just impact that day, they have an effect for many weeks before and after, for example, calculations for weekly rest periods which must take into account every bit of work carried out (regardless of the type of work or employer – see Article 6(5) of EC 561/2006 and Article 34(5)(ii) of EU 165/2014).
I’m afraid that Enforcement authorities also don’t overlook legal requirements simply because drivers are not making sufficient effort to comply. Traffic Commissioners and courts take a similar dim view of excuses that the driver couldn’t remember to do something so the reasons for wanting them to keep manual records instead carry no weight."
I don’t see anything in the email that disagrees with what I’ve said.
He’s not insured so doesn’t need to insert his card.
But that would mean not eligible to drive if something happened to the driver and if they did end up driving they should have had their card in from the beginning
lolipop:
idrive:
I’m taking out a driver with me this week to show him the round before he starts work next week.
He will not be insured to drive the vehicle we will be in.
Does he need to put card in slot 2 even though there is no chance of him driving?I find it rather strange that somebody is learning a route but not insured to drive a particular vehicle. Not knowing how many vehicles the Company has,or why somebody as a future employee is not insured,after all the Driver surely had a driving assessment in a vehicle which he was insured for. Most Companies with a team of Drivers has insurance to cover any vehicle or Driver not individual vehicles.
Another point is where is/was he working before starting with the Company,if it was as a Driver how do you know he is not maxed out on his Tacho with another Company or Agency
Ignore me if its only my mind working overtime
Not everyone does driving assessments, the vast majority of my jobs I’ve not done an assessment, I’m also a named driver on the works insurance and only named drivers can drive a works vehicle.
But I do think it’s a bit random not to start the insurance for when he goes out with the other driver, they could get done quicker or just cover if anything happens to the driver, who knows?
Its there in black and white from a source that you have provided . I’m not entirely sure why you can’t accept whats written .
I have said from the start that the mate did not need a card in as he wasnt insured and only needs a card from the point he was insured . Your source from DVSA / Department of Transport backs that up .
You can twist it any way you like but from this point on your arguing with yourself .
beefy4605:
Its there in black and white from a source that you have provided . I’m not entirely sure why you can’t accept whats written .
I have said from the start that the mate did not need a card in as he wasnt insured and only needs a card from the point he was insured . Your source from DVSA / Department of Transport backs that up .
You can twist it any way you like but from this point on your arguing with yourself .
Which bit is in disagreement with what I’ve consistently written?
Again it is not acceptable to put the card in and do a manual entry as you claim
stevieboy308:
beefy4605:
Its there in black and white from a source that you have provided . I’m not entirely sure why you can’t accept whats written .
I have said from the start that the mate did not need a card in as he wasnt insured and only needs a card from the point he was insured . Your source from DVSA / Department of Transport backs that up .
You can twist it any way you like but from this point on your arguing with yourself .Which bit is in disagreement with what I’ve consistently written?
Again it is not acceptable to put the card in and do a manual entry as you claim
Ok, so as a digicard holder, I should do a log book even though I don’t drive trucks ■■ … behave… the fact is he is a drivers mate and not driving this he is not required to put his digicard in….
He is not obliged to do any manual entry as a driver as he was a drivers mate…
If I get a job as a drivers mate just because I hold a class one doesn’t mean I need to do manual entries, if that was the case all drivers mates with no lgv licence would need to do it…
Just accept you are wrong …l he’s not insured so won’t drive the truck.
discoman:
stevieboy308:
beefy4605:
Its there in black and white from a source that you have provided . I’m not entirely sure why you can’t accept whats written .
I have said from the start that the mate did not need a card in as he wasnt insured and only needs a card from the point he was insured . Your source from DVSA / Department of Transport backs that up .
You can twist it any way you like but from this point on your arguing with yourself .Which bit is in disagreement with what I’ve consistently written?
Again it is not acceptable to put the card in and do a manual entry as you claim
Ok, so as a digicard holder, I should do a log book even though I don’t drive trucks ■■ … behave… the fact is he is a drivers mate and not driving this he is not required to put his digicard in….
He is not obliged to do any manual entry as a driver as he was a drivers mate…
If I get a job as a drivers mate just because I hold a class one doesn’t mean I need to do manual entries, if that was the case all drivers mates with no lgv licence would need to do it…Just accept you are wrong …l he’s not insured so won’t drive the truck.
With the exception being if you drive a HGV as a part time job. Then you should be recording your work as a drivers mate.
As for the OP he is not obliged to put his card in but he is obliged to do a manual entry when he starts driving. For example if he is a drivers mate on the 28th and he started driving on the 31st he would need to record his work he done on the 28th. With a manual entry. Which is why many suggested he just put his card in to save him the hassle.
The rules are stupid in my view and overly complex.
adam277:
discoman:
stevieboy308:
beefy4605:
Its there in black and white from a source that you have provided . I’m not entirely sure why you can’t accept whats written .
I have said from the start that the mate did not need a card in as he wasnt insured and only needs a card from the point he was insured . Your source from DVSA / Department of Transport backs that up .
You can twist it any way you like but from this point on your arguing with yourself .Which bit is in disagreement with what I’ve consistently written?
Again it is not acceptable to put the card in and do a manual entry as you claim
Ok, so as a digicard holder, I should do a log book even though I don’t drive trucks ■■ … behave… the fact is he is a drivers mate and not driving this he is not required to put his digicard in….
He is not obliged to do any manual entry as a driver as he was a drivers mate…
If I get a job as a drivers mate just because I hold a class one doesn’t mean I need to do manual entries, if that was the case all drivers mates with no lgv licence would need to do it…Just accept you are wrong …l he’s not insured so won’t drive the truck.
With the exception being if you drive a HGV as a part time job. Then you should be recording your work as a drivers mate.
As for the OP he is not obliged to put his card in but he is obliged to do a manual entry when he starts driving. For example if he is a drivers mate on the 28th and he started driving on the 31st he would need to record his work he done on the 28th. With a manual entry. Which is why many suggested he just put his card in to save him the hassle.The rules are stupid in my view and overly complex.
Don’t make it complex.
Working in a vehicle with a tacho fitted?
Insert card. Why wouldn’t you?
Well because your not insured to drive it for one lol
We are going pretty deep into this.
But what if you work for a pretty large retailer and they find out that someone who is not insured to drive their trucks has had their card in slot 2 when they go to download the trucks tacho data.
Maybe a rule of their insurance provider is everyone who in the truck must be insured to drive. Or some silly clause in some fine print somewhere that with multi Manning everyone in the truck must be insured to drive
I worked for a few of the giant supermarkets now and they all have the same policy. No passengers at all. As they are not covered on the insurance. You can pick up and drop off other drivers but that’s it.
That all being said. I don’t put my card in slot 2 if I’m showing someone the ropes. Or if I am being given lift to the dealership to pick up a truck.
I just crack on.
Also has anyone ever been stopped by the plod with a passenger driver who has their card in slot 2 but is not insured to drive?
If I was the DVSA I would quite frankly assume they were intending to double man a run with one guy who has no insurance.
And yes the DVSA do check insurance along with tacho records.
So there is a question to be asked about the op putting his card in slot 2
