It's all very well to criticise the definition/use of kerbweight as published but the absence of a better published figure devalues the criticism.
It's all very well to criticise the definition/use of kerbweight as published but the absence of a better published figure devalues the criticism.
I thought you may have more specific information although in all my years caravanning I’ve never come across any restrictions on towing ratio. Don’t plan on phoning any insurer as to me it is academic. My morning today is at the. Wiltshire History Center researching the 94 th Infantry division in Wiltshire circa 1944.When I am unsure, like many others the word "may" is used hoping that someone will clarify and make it crystal clear. What examples would you like that you cannot Google as unfortunately I have never worked for an insurance company so have no idea how they would impose that condition relating to kerbweight or how they would obtain any figures for kerbweight? Why not phone and insurance company with that restriction and ask? You could start with phoning Towergate and asking.
Reviewing the OP he said :-
“We would want a new/newish (up to 2 years old) car with 7 seats and good model reliability (so sorry NOT anything from the Landrover "stable") We are in the fortunate position of cost not really being an issue”.
Big Tim , as you intend touring Europe go for a German . AudiQ7 or VW Touareg take some beating. Are 7 seats that important?
Keep the Buccanneer
“We would want a new/newish (up to 2 years old) car with 7 seats and good model reliability (so sorry NOT anything from the Landrover "stable") We are in the fortunate position of cost not really being an issue”.
Big Tim , as you intend touring Europe go for a German . AudiQ7 or VW Touareg take some beating. Are 7 seats that important?
Keep the Buccanneer
I wasn't criticising the definition of kerbweight at all. It is perfectly clear. What I was criticising was the practice of calling mass in service kerbweight as there can be quite a substantial difference between the two, as there also can be between an ex-works weight and actual kerbweight.
Were these guys the main stay of the American forces on D Day? The Canadians were here in North Wiltshire and to this day send a contingent to the Cricklade Remembrance Sunday event. Then they go up to Blakehill airfield and lay a wreath at the memorial which has been there for decades. Actually there are two Memorials. One for the Canadian Airforce and one for the Canadian Army.
There have been several posts over time about nose weights and possibly the only answer is to have it checked before you buy. The weight ratio is above 85%, but this is a good tow car with an experienced driver and a more stable twin axle, I would not have thought that would be a problem. I would not however tow with a full water tank at the back. Movement of that weight of water could be the instability problem and it should be avoided apart from possibly putting you over the MTPLM as the load allowance is in my mind inadequate.
If you exceed the nose weight though the outfit is illegal, so if you cannot get it down I am afraid the car is not up to the job.
If you exceed the nose weight though the outfit is illegal, so if you cannot get it down I am afraid the car is not up to the job.
I asked the question to Buckman, becasue he has used this claim previously, and it it is clear from the subsequent replies that there is general lack of clarity on the matter.
I totally agree with Lutz's point about the imprecise value of kerbweight. For such a clause to be workable it must use values that cannot be challenged.
But the other factor which the replies so far have not apparently picked up on is which insurance does Buckmans comment relate to. He failed to define if it was the statutory tow vehicle policy or the trailer policy.
It is my understanding that (in the UK) when you take out a car policy, the policy has to cover the vehicle for all its standard specifications, So if the manufacturer specifies its maximum towed weight limit above the cars "kerbweight" then the policy has to cover that extent of use.
However in the UK there is no statutory seperate insurance cover requirement for trailers, the cover offered for trailers can be limited in ways determined by the insurance company, and some (though none I have used ) could stipulate a maximum weight ratio but for it to be manageable it would have to unambiguous as to its value.
I totally agree with Lutz's point about the imprecise value of kerbweight. For such a clause to be workable it must use values that cannot be challenged.
But the other factor which the replies so far have not apparently picked up on is which insurance does Buckmans comment relate to. He failed to define if it was the statutory tow vehicle policy or the trailer policy.
It is my understanding that (in the UK) when you take out a car policy, the policy has to cover the vehicle for all its standard specifications, So if the manufacturer specifies its maximum towed weight limit above the cars "kerbweight" then the policy has to cover that extent of use.
However in the UK there is no statutory seperate insurance cover requirement for trailers, the cover offered for trailers can be limited in ways determined by the insurance company, and some (though none I have used ) could stipulate a maximum weight ratio but for it to be manageable it would have to unambiguous as to its value.
I don't see what detail benefit there is of knowing the nose load of a trailer before you buy it, is. The nose load is a variable and will change as soon as you add any load to a trailer. So any measured load at the sellers premises will not represent the nose load of a caravan when in real use.
When considering an outfit, the first criteria to meet is to ensure the trailers maximum axle load is within the tow vehicles towed weight limit. The tow vehicles tow bar should be designed to accept a vertical nose load of 25kg or 4% as a minimum of the towed weight.
We know the UK industry suggests a nose load of between 5 to 7% of the trailers weight ( not the same thing as the towed weight) but car manufacturers are not required to conform to the same advice. But any caravan that cannot be trimmed by sensible loading to bring is nose load into the 4 to 7% of trailer MTPLM is either badly loaded or designed.
Since when is exceeding the noseweight limit an offence? I don't know of any piece of legislation which states that. The only consequence is loss of any product liability on the part of the manufacturer.
On the other hand, exceeding the noseweight limit may result in exceeding the permitted rear axle load limit of the towing vehicle, and that would be an enforceable offence.
A while back a lot of Baileys were leaving the factory with very high nose loads. All size of models were involved. Subsequently because of complaints the designers took it on board and changes were made. Eg the gas bottle storage is now in cupboards above the axle.
My understanding is that some caravan insurance policies limit the cover (on the caravan) in some cases to a MTPLM of 100% of the car's kerbweight - none of the caravan insurers I've considered or used had/has such a restriction, not that it would concern me as our NCC Towing Ratio is just 66%.
The right answer would have been to design the caravans with the axle placed at the right position to give an acceptable noseweight - moving the gas storage was a fudge!
Exceeding the noseweight limit could be used in evidence to support a charge of Using a vehicle in a dangerous condition
A person is guilty of an offence if he uses, or causes or permits another to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when—
(a)the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer, or of its accessories or equipment, or
(b)the purpose for which it is used, or
(c)the number of passengers carried by it, or the manner in which they are carried, or
(d)the weight, position or distribution of its load, or the manner in which it is secured,
is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
To modify an existing caravan design in such a way in order to reduce its inherent noseweight would require the body to be moved rearward relative to the axle. That would involve a lot more change than relocating the gas bottle storage. It would also increase the overall length of the caravan, which is something that the manufacturer may be reluctant to do for marketing reasons.
Exceeding the noseweight limit could be used in evidence to support a charge of Using a vehicle in a dangerous condition
A person is guilty of an offence if he uses, or causes or permits another to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when—
(a)the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer, or of its accessories or equipment, or
(b)the purpose for which it is used, or
(c)the number of passengers carried by it, or the manner in which they are carried, or
(d)the weight, position or distribution of its load, or the manner in which it is secured,
is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.www.legislation.gov.uk
And where does it say that exceeding the noseweight without exceeding the permitted rear axle load of the towing vehicle would involve possible "danger of injury to any person"? The noseweight would have to be really extraordinarily high to do that, but then the rear axle load would be over the limit too.
I was referring to original design - I understand that if you have a bad design in production then fudging is the only way.
A court would decide whether exceeding the noseweight limit had caused danger - in the same way that any weight infringement is dealt with where the scale of the infringement would be taken into account.
OK, so we agree that it is not illegal as such to exceed the noseweight limit. It would be up to a court to decide whether it constitutes a danger to life and limb.
On the other hand exceeding legal limits is an offence, whether considered dangerous or not.
Last edited:
Over the years in which countries did they serve as I am fairly sure that they served in South Africa during the Boer wars. Interesting subject.
My SIL is sending me a first edition book on the Zulu wars where Welsh regiments served. I am still a member of our BSAP regiment and have been since 1971.
No they left for France after D Day, but we’re based around Chippenham, Trowbridge, Grittleton etc. They were preceded by the 2nd and 4 th US armoured division with the 82 Airborne also in area. Wiltshire had the highest number of US service personnel of anywhere in UK. I‘m doing it on behalf of an old friend and work colleague who i have not seen since the mid 1980s but we keep in touch electronically and he called in last week en route from Cornwall to Islay, then back to Como to dump the RV at the PX and on then home to Colorado. His dad was a Major in the 94th Infantry Division, and told my friend such tales of the fighting that he decided to join the US Navy as a career.
Did the British Army field whole Divisions in the Boer war, I thought that unit description came later before WW1.
I have no idea, but think it was at least three divisions in the 2nd Boer war?
I have to disagree with the notion that moving the gas bottle storage is a fudge. In the case in discussion the caravan was poorly designed to cause such high nose loads in the first place. Moving the gas bottle location is a piece of lateral thinking... But I recall many years ago, and I wish I could remember the make, but on a small caravan the gas bottle was originally located on the off side just ahead of the main axle, with the battery just aft of the axle. It turned out to be a rater practical solution, though it did limit you to one small Calor bottle.
There are two different offences getting confused here. It is illegal to exceed the car makers nose weight limit, this is an absolute offence and other than challenging the weight quoted there is very little grounds for challenge. The second is that the combination is dangerous due to the additional nose weight which would be very difficult to prove and is unlikely to be pursued except in the most extreme cases.
I do agree that a caravan with an excessive nose weight is poorly designed and to me could be regarded as not fit for purpose under the CRA but it could be expensive and risky trying that.
As for insurance, in the UK insurers can impose terms n the policy including a limit on a trailer weight, but if challenged it may not be enforceable. To turn a claim down they must still show that they have treated the customer fairly and the Ombudsman is very unlikely to uphold a repudiation where someone as simply run into the back of the caravan because it is not relevant.
If you overturn the combination on the motorway then it could happen. The insurers problem at that point is proving it was overweight when it is in bits, although if the MIRO is over that looks like a given. Proving a caravan was loaded up to the MTPLM though is very different.
I doubt very much if there is any legislation regarding a car's nose weight. Can you please supply a link to any such legislation? There probably isn't any legislation regarding exceeding the maximum nose weight on the hitch on the caravan.
I would think that the offence is probably exceeding either the maximum limit on the tow bar or exceeding the maximum weight on the rear axle or both. The other offence is of course driving in a manner that is dangerous or similar.
I would think that the offence is probably exceeding either the maximum limit on the tow bar or exceeding the maximum weight on the rear axle or both. The other offence is of course driving in a manner that is dangerous or similar.
What piece of legislation states that exceeding the noseweight limit is an offence? I cannot even find any reference to noseweight in any of the texts that I have read. The excerpts quoted by RogerL don't give any indication either. They only refer to a possible offence in case of a dangerous loading condition. That could be contested so it would be up to a court to decide, but there's no reference to an offence being committed just because the noseweight limit is exceeded.
There is no statutory instrument regarding excess nose load, but by exceeding the makers specified nose load limit the driver might be charged with having an unsafe or unroadworthy vehicle, but that is a subjective matter.
Facebook
Twitter