Rog, it was in Cambridgeshire but it was not the police that prosecuted for speeding over 40mph (regular 50+ was the norm as soon as you got out of the gate) when the nearest dual carriageway at the time was 14 miles away in one direction and 20+ in the other.It was the traffic commisionars who hauled the drivers before them and suspended their vocational licenses for between 3 and 12 weeks.
disgo:
Rog, it was in Cambridgeshire but it was not the police that prosecuted for speeding over 40mph (regular 50+ was the norm as soon as you got out of the gate) when the nearest dual carriageway at the time was 14 miles away in one direction and 20+ in the other.It was the traffic commisionars who hauled the drivers before them and suspended their vocational licenses for between 3 and 12 weeks.
Thank you for that - I stand corrected 
I could not remember the whole story and failed to find a link to it so I could be accurate.
Close but not close enough springs to mind 
Dazza:
I won’t bore you with Overspeed, you either know what I’m talking about or you don’t. Digital tacho users will be well aware of this issue so I apologise for discriminating against the paper-tacho brigade.Now before the Holier Than Thou delegation all chant “It is the driver’s responsibility to keep to the speed limit, blah, blah, zzzzzzzzz”, who ever thought that a driver having to repeatedly press a button on the tacho is a good thing and that it somehow improves safety?
When you are going down a steep hill (think M62 Ainleys to Brighouse or M74 at Happendon). It’s enough of a job keeping the vehicle below 60mph, without the thing bleeping and flashing at you — again and again.
Am I the only one who thinks this feature is a dangerous distraction?
I took part in the consultation on digital tachos. We had to answer around 40 multiple choice questions. There was never any mention of this nonsense.
I for one would scrap it tomorrow.
No Rog, you’re certainly not the only one who dislikes that feature intensely. But, as to getting it removed, we’ve got about as much chance as getting [zb] from a rocking horse.
Not sure about this overspeed thing being an infringement yet, but I had a conversation with a VOSA bod the other day and he said to me that the 60mph speed limit (as posted in the Highway Code for trucks), is now only aimed at vehicles that are not equipped with speed limiters. How many of those do you see ■■? Paddys excepted. If your speed limiter is set to say 90kph, then that is the speed limit for your truck and anything faster than that would be an overspeed. Mine has been set down to 85kph and I suppose that means anything faster than that VOSA or the boys in blue could argue that I was technically speeding. I reckon this needs a bit of proper clarification before the authorities start helping themselves to our wages under the fixed penalty scheme.
On the old tacho set into the dashboard you could adjust the little red light that was set to come on at 50mph - I used to reset mine to 40 as I found it more useful.
Is this overspeed setting the same thing 
Can it also be adjusted, perhaps at the back of the unit
ROG:
On the old tacho set into the dashboard you could adjust the little red light that was set to come on at 50mph - I used to reset mine to 40 as I found it more useful.
Is this overspeed setting the same thing
Can it also be adjusted, perhaps at the back of the unit
it can be adjusted, but only with a tacho programmer plugged into the head.
you can have the overspeed setting higher than the limiter, but vosa/tc’s want them set the same for some reason.
Grumpygraeme:
Not sure about this overspeed thing being an infringement yet, but I had a conversation with a VOSA bod the other day and he said to me that the 60mph speed limit (as posted in the Highway Code for trucks), is now only aimed at vehicles that are not equipped with speed limiters.
He was talking nonsense. The 60 mph speed limit for trucks on motorways applies to all trucks regardless of whether they are equipped with a speed limiter.
Grumpygraeme:
If your speed limiter is set to say 90kph, then that is the speed limit for your truck and anything faster than that would be an overspeed.
It would, but an overspeed is a meaningless thing and is simply a bit of information and not an offence.
Grumpygraeme:
Mine has been set down to 85kph and I suppose that means anything faster than that VOSA or the boys in blue could argue that I was technically speeding.
Only if they were stupid. The speed limit for your vehicle on the motorway is 60 mph, regardless of what your limiter is set to.
Grumpygraeme:
I reckon this needs a bit of proper clarification before the authorities start helping themselves to our wages under the fixed penalty scheme.
It is already very clear, the speed limit for trucks can be found in The Highway Code where there is no mention of different speed limits for vehicles fitted with a speed limiter and those not. This means there are no legal grounds for a driver to be prosecuted for a speeding offence for doing 60 mph on a motorway so they will not be helping themselves to your wages.
The regulations regarding speed limiters only say the vehicle must not be capable of being powered beyond the set speed, nothing in any regulations makes it an offence for momentum to take the vehicle beyond the set speed.
The next time you have a VOSA officer or a copper telling you this nonsense about you having a different speed limit to other trucks tell them they are an idiot, suggest they could do with some training and ask them to show you the legislation which backs up their claim. They won’t be able to because none exists.
I really don’t know why people are getting wound up about this. The low fuel warning light coming on isn’t an infringement or offence and the overspeed warning is about the same level of importance as that, just another bit of information for the driver the same as any of the instruments on the dashboard give.
I can see a few printing off the post above and taking it with them 
i have just read that the speed of the tacho as a tolerance of 6km/h and if thats the case how could there use it to prove you were speeding
(f) Maximum tolerances (visual and recording instruments)
- In use:
(a) distance travelled:
4 % more or less than the real distance, where that distance is at least one kilometre;
(b) speed:
6 km/h more or less than the real speed;
(c) time:
± two minutes per day, or
± 10 minutes per seven days.
I would assume there are tolerances for everything but it would be up to the courts to determine if those tolerances were acceptable.
delboytwo:
i have just read that the speed of the tacho as a tolerance of 6km/h and if thats the case how could there use it to prove you were speeding(b) speed:
6 km/h more or less than the real speed;
Could I ask where you read that Del, the reason I ask is because “(EEC) No 3821/85” states a speed tolerance of “3 km/h more or less than the real speed” and I can’t find an amendment in “(EC) No 2135/98”.
As far as the speeding point is concerned even if the tachograph speed tolerance was 6 km/h either way, I think you’ll find that the police will normally allow a greater tolerance than the 3.7 mph (6km/h), and it would only be used to back up other evidence anyway
Not only overspeed which is a pain in the arse, but what about the tacho recording POA as a break?
Totally throws me sometimes.
bowserman:
Not only overspeed which is a pain in the arse, but what about the tacho recording POA as a break?Totally throws me sometimes.
Very simple solution to that one, don’t use POA. If a period qualifies as POA it certainly qualifies as break, the requirements for break are less than those of POA so forget POA, book it as break, and you won’t have the problem. Neither count toward your working time totals for the WTD so it won’t be a problem.
Coffeeholic:
bowserman:
Not only overspeed which is a pain in the arse, but what about the tacho recording POA as a break?Totally throws me sometimes.
Very simple solution to that one, don’t use POA. If a period qualifies as POA it certainly qualifies as break, the requirements for break are less than those of POA so forget POA, book it as break, and you won’t have the problem. Neither count toward your working time totals for the WTD so it won’t be a problem.
The only problem with that one is that where I work, you only get 45 mins paid break per day, so thats all we show, or if I say have 2 x 30 min breaks I lose 15 mins pay.
bowserman:
Not only overspeed which is a pain in the arse, but what about the tacho recording POA as a break?Totally throws me sometimes.
And the fact that it recognises 15 minute breaks weather they count as driver breaks or not, not a real problem but the implementation of the digital tachograph should have been left until after the regulations changed.
I prefer the digital tachograph myself but have to say it was rushed into operation presumably to keep the manufacturers happy 
bowserman:
The only problem with that one is that where I work, you only get 45 mins paid break per day, so thats all we show, or if I say have 2 x 30 min breaks I lose 15 mins pay.
Ahh, that’s not good. 
You have the only valid reason for booking POA then and there is no way round the POA booked as break problem unfortunately.
tachograph:
delboytwo:
i have just read that the speed of the tacho as a tolerance of 6km/h and if thats the case how could there use it to prove you were speeding(b) speed:
6 km/h more or less than the real speed;
Could I ask where you read that Del, the reason I ask is because “(EEC) No 3821/85” states a speed tolerance of “3 km/h more or less than the real speed” and I can’t find an amendment in “(EC) No 2135/98”.
As far as the speeding point is concerned even if the tachograph speed tolerance was 6 km/h either way, I think you’ll find that the police will normally allow a greater tolerance than the 3.7 mph (6km/h), and it would only be used to back up other evidence anyway
the bit you have said mate is on the bench
(f) Maximum tolerances (visual and recording instruments)
- On the test bench before installation:
(a) distance travelled:
1 % more or less than the real distance, where that distance is at least one kilometre;
(b) speed:
3 km/h more or less than the real speed;
(c) time:
± two minutes per day with a maximum of 10 minutes per seven days in cases where the running period of the clock after rewinding is not less than that period.
- On installation:
(a) distance travalled:
2 % more or less than the real distance, where that distance is at least one kilometre;
(b) speed:
4 km/h more or less than the real speed;
(c) time:
± two minutes per day, or
± 10 minutes per seven days.
- In use:
(a) distance travelled:
4 % more or less than the real distance, where that distance is at least one kilometre;
(b) speed:
6 km/h more or less than the real speed;
(c) time:
± two minutes per day, or
± 10 minutes per seven days.
if you have a look at the red bits above
this is the link
Coffeeholic:
bowserman:
The only problem with that one is that where I work, you only get 45 mins paid break per day, so thats all we show, or if I say have 2 x 30 min breaks I lose 15 mins pay.Ahh, that’s not good.
Its a shame, all that it needed was to be programmed properly in the first place. Have a hours guard so still use that, thought it would be redundand when I went digital.
delboytwo:
this is the link
Thanks Del, you’re right 
tachograph:
Thanks Del, you’re right Image
that’s got to be a first for me 