The contents of the thread has certainly improved my knowledge of the situation. It seems as a passenger who is capable of taking over the vehicle you need to have your card in slot 2. I previously thought it was just if using the multi-manning rules that it was necessary. I guess it does prevent a sort of situation where a vehicle could be in continuous use for days with one driver doing a shift followed by the other, while both are actually present.
I don’t really know how this works at the roadside tbh. I guess the DVSA officer starts interrogating the passenger on his/her status. I don’t know if the onus is on the DVSA to prove so, or the passenger to prove otherwise. A genuine non-driver wouldn’t have a clue what is going on and suddenly an onus of proof is being placed on him/her, so it seems anyway.
shullbit:
Because going back to the OPs question which he asked, does he NEED to put his card in slot 2, the simple answer is that he doesn’t need to, that’s why. So this thread should be 2 posts long!
The trouble with that is it’s not beyond all imagination that he could end up doing some driving, I would like to think we could all agree on that? But I won’t hold my breath. And that is were direct answers fail to give a good answer despite being correct.
Like I said, I from the beginning said he doesn’t need to put his card in, that is the legal answer, but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.
If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.
You may disagree, but I don’t think that would been a good outcome from him asking for advice
Can I drive 4 ten hour shift in a row? The answer is yes, but that doesn’t tell the full story does it?
I don’t get why people have been losing their ■■■■ over answering that covers real world potential of what might happen
shullbit:
Because going back to the OPs question which he asked, does he NEED to put his card in slot 2, the simple answer is that he doesn’t need to, that’s why. So this thread should be 2 posts long!
The trouble with that is it’s not beyond all imagination that he could end up doing some driving, I would like to think we could all agree on that? But I won’t hold my breath. And that is were direct answers fail to give a good answer despite being correct.
Like I said, I from the beginning said he doesn’t need to put his card in, that is the legal answer, but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.
If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.
You may disagree, but I don’t think that would been a good outcome from him asking for advice
Can I drive 4 ten hour shift in a row? The answer is yes, but that doesn’t tell the full story does it?
I don’t get why people have been losing their [zb] over answering that covers real world potential of what might happen
When he gets in the vehicle he isn’t insured so its not conceivable as you say that he will need to drive later on, because when they start their journey he cannot legally drive the vehicle, it doesn’t matter if they put him on the insurance halfway through the journey because of an unforeseen occurrence, if you are not legally allowed to drive the vehicle you are not a driver under the multi manning rules absolutely no need to put your card in, in any circumstance whatsoever, IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE ANSWER as you say, because at the start of the journey HE IS NOT AVAILABLE AS DRIVER, so there is no need to put his card in ‘‘just in case circumstances change’’ I am saying no more on the matter because I know I am right, its common sense and the rules are clear.
shullbit:
Because going back to the OPs question which he asked, does he NEED to put his card in slot 2, the simple answer is that he doesn’t need to, that’s why. So this thread should be 2 posts long!
The trouble with that is it’s not beyond all imagination that he could end up doing some driving, I would like to think we could all agree on that? But I won’t hold my breath. And that is were direct answers fail to give a good answer despite being correct.
Like I said, I from the beginning said he doesn’t need to put his card in, that is the legal answer, but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.
If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.
You may disagree, but I don’t think that would been a good outcome from him asking for advice
Can I drive 4 ten hour shift in a row? The answer is yes, but that doesn’t tell the full story does it?
I don’t get why people have been losing their [zb] over answering that covers real world potential of what might happen
When he gets in the vehicle he isn’t insured so its not conceivable as you say that he will need to drive later on, because when they start their journey he cannot legally drive the vehicle, it doesn’t matter if they put him on the insurance halfway through the journey because of an unforeseen occurrence, if you are not legally allowed to drive the vehicle you are not a driver under the multi manning rules absolutely no need to put your card in, in any circumstance whatsoever, IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE ANSWER as you say, because at the start of the journey HE IS NOT AVAILABLE AS DRIVER, so there is no need to put his card in ‘‘just in case circumstances change’’ I am saying no more on the matter because I know I am right, its common sense and the rules are clear.
Good idea, you’ll stop looking silly that way
Without looking silly, Can you point out in the legislation where it allows for unforseen circumstances in the definition of a driver?
It doesn’t, so once again, not being insured means he doesn’t have to put his card in, again I said this right at the beginning.
But there’s nothing in the legislation that allows for unforseen circumstances in the definition of a driver, so if you don’t put your card in at the beginning you can’t later on in the shift and be legal. Simple enough?
you said ‘‘If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.’’
Believe me pal, that is not how the law would work, there would be proof that the insurance was sorted halfway through the shift so there is proof that no law has been broken by not inserting his card in slot 2. That is just a foolish statement.
shullbit:
you said ‘‘If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.’’
Believe me pal, that is not how the law would work, there would be proof that the insurance was sorted halfway through the shift so there is proof that no law has been broken by not inserting his card in slot 2. That is just a foolish statement.
If you end up driving then you were clearly being carried in the vehicle as part of your duties to drive it if it becomes necessary, and that is the test for the EU regs.
So I’m gonna believe the 561/2006 legislation on its definition of what a driver is for the 561/2006 legislation as opposed you
shullbit:
you said ‘‘If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.’’
Believe me pal, that is not how the law would work, there would be proof that the insurance was sorted halfway through the shift so there is proof that no law has been broken by not inserting his card in slot 2. That is just a foolish statement.
If you end up driving then you were clearly being carried in the vehicle as part of your duties to drive it if it becomes necessary, and that is the test for the EU regs.
So I’m gonna believe the 561/2006 legislation on its definition of what a driver is for the 561/2006 legislation as opposed you
So, lets say you are not insured to drive, you put your card in slot 2 because you ‘‘think’’ you are double manned, even though you are not double manned because slot 2 guy cannot legally drive, you get stopped, in the eyes of dvsa you could be trying to pull a fast one because double manned you could do say a 21 hour shift, driver 1 drives 10 hours the rest of shift is made up of rest and other work with no driving from the un-insured slot 2 guy, now who gets a big fat fine for trying to pull the wool over plods eyes, you who has put his card in? or me who hasn’t?
shullbit:
Have a read of the same policy and show us where it tells you that you have to put your card in slot 2 if you WILL NOT be available to drive during that shift, i have already shown earlier in black and white from .gov that defines that you can only be classed as a driver if you are actually going to be available to drive the thing, no insurance so not available to drive, this would stand up in court!!!
Ill ask the same question as before: Why wouldnt you put your card in?
At the roadside a cop or DVSA will see two crew members. They will expect two cards in the tacho.
If not the onus now falls onto the #2 driver to explain why he hasnt put his card in doesnt it?
Why put yourself into the position of appearing to be in the wrong, even if you arent? Standing there arguing that you dont actually have insurance for this vehicle, nor any vehicle you could get into later on in the shift, doesn`t seem very good to me.
I can see not putting a card in could cause arguments.
I can see no (legal) advantage to keeping it out.
Assuming you are not actually working illegal hours. Not being discussed here.
…Can leaving your card out ever be illegal? Yes.
Maybe not in some cases, but it can in others.
…Can leaving card in ever be illegal? No.
At least I don`t think anyone has suggested that?
Card in for me, then.
Because the card in slot 2 records the wrong mode. Poa instead of other work.
shullbit:
Have a read of the same policy and show us where it tells you that you have to put your card in slot 2 if you WILL NOT be available to drive during that shift, i have already shown earlier in black and white from .gov that defines that you can only be classed as a driver if you are actually going to be available to drive the thing, no insurance so not available to drive, this would stand up in court!!!
Ill ask the same question as before: Why wouldnt you put your card in?
At the roadside a cop or DVSA will see two crew members. They will expect two cards in the tacho.
If not the onus now falls onto the #2 driver to explain why he hasnt put his card in doesnt it?
Why put yourself into the position of appearing to be in the wrong, even if you arent? Standing there arguing that you dont actually have insurance for this vehicle, nor any vehicle you could get into later on in the shift, doesn`t seem very good to me.
I can see not putting a card in could cause arguments.
I can see no (legal) advantage to keeping it out.
Assuming you are not actually working illegal hours. Not being discussed here.
…Can leaving your card out ever be illegal? Yes.
Maybe not in some cases, but it can in others.
…Can leaving card in ever be illegal? No.
At least I don`t think anyone has suggested that?
Card in for me, then.
Because the card in slot 2 records the wrong mode. Poa instead of other work.
Irrelevant, the card shouldn’t be in slot 2 in the first place BECAUSE HE ISNT INSURED!!!
shullbit:
you said ‘‘If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.’’
Believe me pal, that is not how the law would work, there would be proof that the insurance was sorted halfway through the shift so there is proof that no law has been broken by not inserting his card in slot 2. That is just a foolish statement.
If you end up driving then you were clearly being carried in the vehicle as part of your duties to drive it if it becomes necessary, and that is the test for the EU regs.
So I’m gonna believe the 561/2006 legislation on its definition of what a driver is for the 561/2006 legislation as opposed you
So, lets say you are not insured to drive, you put your card in slot 2 because you ‘‘think’’ you are double manned, even though you are not double manned because slot 2 guy cannot legally drive, you get stopped, in the eyes of dvsa you could be trying to pull a fast one because double manned you could do say a 21 hour shift, driver 1 drives 10 hours the rest of shift is made up of rest and other work with no driving from the un-insured slot 2 guy, now who gets a big fat fine for trying to pull the wool over plods eyes, you who has put his card in? or me who hasn’t?
For the 739 time, if you are not insured then you are not available to drive and if you’re not available to drive you do not need to put your card in.
So where you’re getting that I think you need to put your card in under that circumstance is beyond me.
So by putting your card in how do you think you can get done for insufficient rest unless you’ve had insufficient rest? The law doesn’t work that way you would have to have insufficient rest. Unless you can find the specific fine they could issue for your future insufficient rest from the enforcement sanctions policy, I’ve linked the latest version of it in a reply to Adam to Save you time, you’re welcome.
shullbit:
you said ‘‘If the 1st person had replied no, no need to put their card in, then the thread was locked, they set off, something happens later on, they spend 2 mins on the phone to bring the insurance date forward, he does a manual entry an starts driving, they get stopped, he gets a £300 fine for failing to use his card for the beginning of the shift.’’
Believe me pal, that is not how the law would work, there would be proof that the insurance was sorted halfway through the shift so there is proof that no law has been broken by not inserting his card in slot 2. That is just a foolish statement.
If you end up driving then you were clearly being carried in the vehicle as part of your duties to drive it if it becomes necessary, and that is the test for the EU regs.
So I’m gonna believe the 561/2006 legislation on its definition of what a driver is for the 561/2006 legislation as opposed you
So, lets say you are not insured to drive, you put your card in slot 2 because you ‘‘think’’ you are double manned, even though you are not double manned because slot 2 guy cannot legally drive, you get stopped, in the eyes of dvsa you could be trying to pull a fast one because double manned you could do say a 21 hour shift, driver 1 drives 10 hours the rest of shift is made up of rest and other work with no driving from the un-insured slot 2 guy, now who gets a big fat fine for trying to pull the wool over plods eyes, you who has put his card in? or me who hasn’t?
For the 739 time, if you are not insured then you are not available to drive and if you’re not available to drive you do not need to put your card in.
So where you’re getting that I think you need to put your card in under that circumstance is beyond me.
You said this ‘‘but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.’’ That’s where i get it from, but he doesn’t need to put his card in at all does he because he isn’t available as a driver as defined in THE RULES, and infract by doing so could fall foul of dvsa, so no, it doesn’t change the answer
shullbit:
You said this ‘‘but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.’’ That’s where i get it from, but he doesn’t need to put his card in at all does he because he isn’t available as a driver as defined in THE RULES, and infract by doing so could fall foul of dvsa, so no, it doesn’t change the answer
2 separate scenarios which I don’t see how anyone can’t see?
Again not insured = no card in required
But if want the potential to drive later on = card in
Read that little bit 6 or 7 times till it sinks in.
Post up from the enforcement sanctions policy which fine they could issue because you fall foul of them in your words
shullbit:
You said this ‘‘but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.’’ That’s where i get it from, but he doesn’t need to put his card in at all does he because he isn’t available as a driver as defined in THE RULES, and infract by doing so could fall foul of dvsa, so no, it doesn’t change the answer
2 separate scenarios which I don’t see how anyone can’t see?
Again not insured = no card in required
But if want the potential to drive later on = card in
Read that little bit 6 or 7 times till it sinks in.
Post up from the enforcement sanctions policy which fine they could issue because you fall foul of them in your words
let the fact that he isn’t insured to drive sink in pal, or that hypothetically he is insured but he may have already done 90 hours driving sink in, or they may illegally do a 21 hour shift by having someone who is unavailable to drive have his card in slot 2 and run as though they are double manned so they can get back home sink in, read it 6 or 7 times just so you can get your head round it
The fact of the matter is he is UNAVAILABLE (Definition…not able to be used)
shullbit:
You said this ‘‘but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.’’ That’s where i get it from, but he doesn’t need to put his card in at all does he because he isn’t available as a driver as defined in THE RULES, and infract by doing so could fall foul of dvsa, so no, it doesn’t change the answer
2 separate scenarios which I don’t see how anyone can’t see?
Again not insured = no card in required
But if want the potential to drive later on = card in
Read that little bit 6 or 7 times till it sinks in.
Post up from the enforcement sanctions policy which fine they could issue because you fall foul of them in your words
let the fact that he isn’t insured to drive sink in pal, or that hypothetically he is insured but he may have already done 90 hours driving sink in, or they may illegally do a 21 hour shift by having someone who is unavailable to drive have his card in slot 2 and run as though they are double manned so they can get back home sink in, read it 6 or 7 times just so you can get your head round it
The fact of the matter is he is UNAVAILABLE (Definition…not able to be used)
Everyone else who argued with me was smart enough to got there in the end.
You’re last man standing, well-done you, not really a prize anyone wants though
Oh yeah, you never did post up the future insufficient rest fine did you
shullbit:
You said this ‘‘but I pushed the debate on to cover what would happen if he wanted or needed to drive later on as that then completely changes the answer.’’ That’s where i get it from, but he doesn’t need to put his card in at all does he because he isn’t available as a driver as defined in THE RULES, and infract by doing so could fall foul of dvsa, so no, it doesn’t change the answer
2 separate scenarios which I don’t see how anyone can’t see?
Again not insured = no card in required
But if want the potential to drive later on = card in
Read that little bit 6 or 7 times till it sinks in.
Post up from the enforcement sanctions policy which fine they could issue because you fall foul of them in your words
let the fact that he isn’t insured to drive sink in pal, or that hypothetically he is insured but he may have already done 90 hours driving sink in, or they may illegally do a 21 hour shift by having someone who is unavailable to drive have his card in slot 2 and run as though they are double manned so they can get back home sink in, read it 6 or 7 times just so you can get your head round it
The fact of the matter is he is UNAVAILABLE (Definition…not able to be used)
Everyone else who argued with me was smart enough to got there in the end.
You’re last man standing, well-done you, not really a prize anyone wants though
Oh yeah, you never did post up the future insufficient rest fine did you
There would be a case for insufficient rest if it was discovered at a later date, also using a card in slot 2 when not legally allowed to drive so you can do longer than a 15 hour shift would be mean a fraud would have been committed which is a much more serious offence. If you want to run under double manned rules, both drivers would have to be legally allowed to drive the vehicle and both be in the vehicle within the first hour of the journey otherwise it would be single manned, its not too hard to understand is it
shullbit:
There would be a case for insufficient rest if it was discovered at a later date, also using a card in slot 2 when not legally allowed to drive so you can do longer than a 15 hour shift would be mean a fraud would have been committed which is a much more serious offence. If you want to run under double manned rules, both drivers would have to be legally allowed to drive the vehicle and both be in the vehicle within the first hour of the journey otherwise it would be single manned, its not too hard to understand is it
Right so you’re now changing it from you’d get busted for putting your card in for a future insufficient rest they think you’re gonna do to a if you actually did an insufficient rest.
So as you are now saying, there’s only a problem if you go over 15 hours, so you must have changed your position that there’s no problem putting your card in if you don’t go over 15 hours, so you’re now in agreement that there’s nothing wrong with putting your card in slot 2. Knew we’d get there in the end
shullbit:
There would be a case for insufficient rest if it was discovered at a later date, also using a card in slot 2 when not legally allowed to drive so you can do longer than a 15 hour shift would be mean a fraud would have been committed which is a much more serious offence. If you want to run under double manned rules, both drivers would have to be legally allowed to drive the vehicle and both be in the vehicle within the first hour of the journey otherwise it would be single manned, its not too hard to understand is it
Right so you’re now changing it from you’d get busted for putting your card in for a future insufficient rest they think you’re gonna do to a if you actually did an insufficient rest.
So as you are now saying, there’s only a problem if you go over 15 hours, so you must have changed your position that there’s no problem putting your card in if you don’t go over 15 hours, so you’re now in agreement that there’s nothing wrong with putting your card in slot 2. Knew we’d get there in the end
shullbit:
There would be a case for insufficient rest if it was discovered at a later date, also using a card in slot 2 when not legally allowed to drive so you can do longer than a 15 hour shift would be mean a fraud would have been committed which is a much more serious offence. If you want to run under double manned rules, both drivers would have to be legally allowed to drive the vehicle and both be in the vehicle within the first hour of the journey otherwise it would be single manned, its not too hard to understand is it
Right so you’re now changing it from you’d get busted for putting your card in for a future insufficient rest they think you’re gonna do to a if you actually did an insufficient rest.
So as you are now saying, there’s only a problem if you go over 15 hours, so you must have changed your position that there’s no problem putting your card in if you don’t go over 15 hours, so you’re now in agreement that there’s nothing wrong with putting your card in slot 2. Knew we’d get there in the end
you would have to have insufficient rest. Unless you can find the specific fine they could issue for your future insufficient rest from the enforcement sanctions policy, I’ve linked the latest version of it in a reply to Adam to Save you time, you’re welcome.