VOSA ain't as cleaver as they think they are !

May 21, 2008
2,463
0
0
Visit site
This will raise a smile.
My bro-in-law got stopped by VOSA the other day. He was driving his Espace and towing a trailer 8ft x 4ft.
First off they got him for driving the Espace taking his errection gang of 6 blokes to the job site. Although technically, he was driving to his place of work and not charging the people for using his car.
Next was the trailer. They siad that the ratchet leg of the old style bradley double lock over run brake system was missing and should be engaged in the ratchet teeth on the top of the hitch to be activated by the breakaway cable. If you put the ratchet lever to the engaged position, the first time you hit the brakes, you lock on the trailer brakes. So their impression of the brake functionality was wrong.
But despite that they issued a prohibition notice only allowing travel to be repaired.

My bro got the ratchet lever fixed and took the trailer to the local VOSA MOT station for inspection and stamping of the notice so that he could then go to the cop shop to get the release signed off. When he got to the cop shop, he found out that the prohiition notice was the wrong type. VOSA had issued a vehicle notice and not a trailer notice. Then to cap it all, the copper looked at the trailer and said that the hand written number plate was illegal and had not been put on the VOSA notice, as too was, the bolts protruding from the corner posts of the trailer body as they class as sharp protrussions. Then when he saw the brake lever repair, he said that it didn't matter about the ratchet not working as that was just for parking anyway and on that basis, the VOSA notice should not of been issued.

Oh I nearly forgot. The VOSA chappie tryed to get a diesel sample out of the fuel tank but couldn't get past the anti-syphon devices. Instead he proclaimed that just by sniffing the tank filler neck he could tell if red diesel was present. I've never heard such a load of cobblers in my life. The VOSA chap isn't super man! All the idiot had to do was to take the fuel filter off to get a fuel sample.

So my best advice would be, to know a bit about how your car and trailer functions, just in case you get Eignsteigne sniffing your tank.

I had a simlar situation when I towed a twin axle horsebox. The front wheel bearings of the box were warmer than the back, because the box was travelling nose down due to a low hitch height on my Laguna.He swore blind I'd got knackered wheel bearings. The accompanying police traffic cop had to take him aside and put him right before I lost my temper!!

I don't know where they get them from but VOSA needs to swap the V for a T in some instances
 
Aug 11, 2010
1,362
0
0
Visit site
Hi steve. Not sure how it works, but basic car insurance carries the terms "place of work" as being the same static address, otherwise you need some sort of commercial type of insurance as the vehicle is used for work purposes, and it also appears a trailer is needed too, again for work purposes! not covered by standard to and fro car insurance.
The way you worded your response, its easy to assume your BIL only has standard car insurance, so "technically" VOSA were right and your BIL does not have the right insurance cover, to use his vehicle for working purposes.
No idea about the technicalities of towing equipment i readily admit that, but Regardless how well you are keyed up on VOSA, I would point out two things. 1. never loose your temper. 2. You can study non stop and think you know what is what, but where VOSA is concerned regardless of them being right or wrong,and lets be honest there is a far greater chance of them being right, you are the one that will suffer. No point loosing your temper or vigorously arguing with them, it just leads to more problems...
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
steveinleo said:
This will raise a smile.
My bro-in-law got stopped by VOSA the other day. He was driving his Espace and towing a trailer 8ft x 4ft.
First off they got him for driving the Espace taking his errection gang of 6 blokes to the job site. Although technically, he was driving to his place of work and not charging the people for using his car.
Next was the trailer. They siad that the ratchet leg of the old style bradley double lock over run brake system was missing and should be engaged in the ratchet teeth on the top of the hitch to be activated by the breakaway cable. If you put the ratchet lever to the engaged position, the first time you hit the brakes, you lock on the trailer brakes. So their impression of the brake functionality was wrong.
But despite that they issued a prohibition notice only allowing travel to be repaired.

My bro got the ratchet lever fixed and took the trailer to the local VOSA MOT station for inspection and stamping of the notice so that he could then go to the cop shop to get the release signed off. When he got to the cop shop, he found out that the prohiition notice was the wrong type. VOSA had issued a vehicle notice and not a trailer notice. Then to cap it all, the copper looked at the trailer and said that the hand written number plate was illegal and had not been put on the VOSA notice, as too was, the bolts protruding from the corner posts of the trailer body as they class as sharp protrussions. Then when he saw the brake lever repair, he said that it didn't matter about the ratchet not working as that was just for parking anyway and on that basis, the VOSA notice should not of been issued.

Oh I nearly forgot. The VOSA chappie tryed to get a diesel sample out of the fuel tank but couldn't get past the anti-syphon devices. Instead he proclaimed that just by sniffing the tank filler neck he could tell if red diesel was present. I've never heard such a load of cobblers in my life. The VOSA chap isn't super man! All the idiot had to do was to take the fuel filter off to get a fuel sample.

So my best advice would be, to know a bit about how your car and trailer functions, just in case you get Eignsteigne sniffing your tank.

I had a simlar situation when I towed a twin axle horsebox. The front wheel bearings of the box were warmer than the back, because the box was travelling nose down due to a low hitch height on my Laguna.He swore blind I'd got knackered wheel bearings. The accompanying police traffic cop had to take him aside and put him right before I lost my temper!!

I don't know where they get them from but VOSA needs to swap the V for a T in some instances

"I had a simlar situation when I towed a twin axle horsebox. The front wheel bearings of the box were warmer than the back, because the box was travelling nose down due to a low hitch height on my Laguna.He swore blind I'd got knackered wheel bearings. The accompanying police traffic cop had to take him aside and put him right before I lost my temper!!"

There should be no reason for the horse box to adopt a nose down attitude if the hitch height on the Laguna was travelling at between 395mm and 465mm, unless the rear suspension was excessively worn, even in a nose down attitude unless excessively worn, heat should not be generated from the wheel bearings.
How would the examining VOSA officer have distinguished where the heat was being generated? most wheel heat comes from the brakes, or again unless you have a worn / collapsed wheel bearing.
I have spent many previous years working in close harmony with VOSA inspectors, and believe me they are no fools and can spot a potential fault a mile off, and would be a laughing stock back at base if they were not able to get a simple test sample of fuel.
The accompanying Traffic cop would play no part whatsoever in the vehicle examiners roll and vis versa, he would be more inclined to pull you aside and put you right for obstructing a VOSA examiner in the course of his duty
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
cookieones said:
steveinleo said:
This will raise a smile.
My bro-in-law got stopped by VOSA the other day. He was driving his Espace and towing a trailer 8ft x 4ft.
First off they got him for driving the Espace taking his errection gang of 6 blokes to the job site. Although technically, he was driving to his place of work and not charging the people for using his car.
Next was the trailer. They siad that the ratchet leg of the old style bradley double lock over run brake system was missing and should be engaged in the ratchet teeth on the top of the hitch to be activated by the breakaway cable. If you put the ratchet lever to the engaged position, the first time you hit the brakes, you lock on the trailer brakes. So their impression of the brake functionality was wrong.
But despite that they issued a prohibition notice only allowing travel to be repaired.

My bro got the ratchet lever fixed and took the trailer to the local VOSA MOT station for inspection and stamping of the notice so that he could then go to the cop shop to get the release signed off. When he got to the cop shop, he found out that the prohiition notice was the wrong type. VOSA had issued a vehicle notice and not a trailer notice. Then to cap it all, the copper looked at the trailer and said that the hand written number plate was illegal and had not been put on the VOSA notice, as too was, the bolts protruding from the corner posts of the trailer body as they class as sharp protrussions. Then when he saw the brake lever repair, he said that it didn't matter about the ratchet not working as that was just for parking anyway and on that basis, the VOSA notice should not of been issued.

Oh I nearly forgot. The VOSA chappie tryed to get a diesel sample out of the fuel tank but couldn't get past the anti-syphon devices. Instead he proclaimed that just by sniffing the tank filler neck he could tell if red diesel was present. I've never heard such a load of cobblers in my life. The VOSA chap isn't super man! All the idiot had to do was to take the fuel filter off to get a fuel sample.

So my best advice would be, to know a bit about how your car and trailer functions, just in case you get Eignsteigne sniffing your tank.

I had a simlar situation when I towed a twin axle horsebox. The front wheel bearings of the box were warmer than the back, because the box was travelling nose down due to a low hitch height on my Laguna.He swore blind I'd got knackered wheel bearings. The accompanying police traffic cop had to take him aside and put him right before I lost my temper!!

I don't know where they get them from but VOSA needs to swap the V for a T in some instances

"I had a simlar situation when I towed a twin axle horsebox. The front wheel bearings of the box were warmer than the back, because the box was travelling nose down due to a low hitch height on my Laguna.He swore blind I'd got knackered wheel bearings. The accompanying police traffic cop had to take him aside and put him right before I lost my temper!!"

There should be no reason for the horse box to adopt a nose down attitude if the hitch height on the Laguna was travelling at between 395mm and 465mm, unless the rear suspension was excessively worn, even in a nose down attitude unless excessively worn, heat should not be generated from the wheel bearings.
How would the examining VOSA officer have distinguished where the heat was being generated? most wheel heat comes from the brakes, or again unless you have a worn / collapsed wheel bearing.
I have spent many previous years working in close harmony with VOSA inspectors, and believe me they are no fools and can spot a potential fault a mile off, and would be a laughing stock back at base if they were not able to get a simple test sample of fuel.
The accompanying Traffic cop would play no part whatsoever in the vehicle examiners roll and vis versa, he would be more inclined to pull you aside and put you right for obstructing a VOSA examiner in the course of his duty

And another point to remember is that the trailer was not in a roadworthy condition "They siad that the ratchet leg of the old style bradley double lock over run brake system was missing" So how could the parking brake be engaged when detached from the towing vehicle? Very lucky not to be facing a fine for using a defective vehicle on a public highway.
 
May 21, 2008
2,463
0
0
Visit site
Having now been able to talk to my bro direct I have a little more info.

Insurance issue.

The car is insured for commercial use by it's registered keeper and owner. His brother was behind the wheel at the time and while not a named driver on the vehicle policy, he had third party cover on his insurance to drive a vehicle not owned by him or hired to him. This cover is fairly standard on comprehensive car insurances. The only stipulation being that the vehicle is correctly insured by it's owner which it is.

Trailer issue.

1/ Trailers towed behind cars using the 50mm ball or eye and drop pin hitch are not registered seperately in the uk. There is a prohibition document covering trailers specifically and a seperate document for vehicles. VOSA issued a vehicle prohibition against the car but not the trailer for a fault on the trailer. (I've seen the documents now).

2/ The missing ratchet lever plays no part in the towability or functionallity of the trailer while being towed. If it was engaged in the ratchet grooves on the hitch head, the brakes on the trailer would lock on at the first application of the car brakes when the trailer hitch head operated.
The trailer was missing a break away cable which is an advisory fault. However it would actually require a retaining chain to keep the trailer contained by the vehicle in the event of discoupling while on the move, because ratchet braked trailers don't have the ability to drag on the hand brake.
To safely uncouple the trailer, they have always used chocks behind and in front of the trailer wheels to stop any run away.
A point to remember is that we are talking about your average 500Kg 8ft x 4ft general purpose trailer here.

My oppinion on this is.
The insurance should be contested in court as technically both the vehicle and it's owner had correct insurance and the drive all be it a relative, had basic third party cover for himself to drive the afore mentioned vehicle as long as it was insured, which it was.

Having an MOT system for trailers would clarify the legallities of brake system design and functionallity. Apart from not having a parking brake which is optional as chocks are advised for non braked lightweight trailers in most trailer construction manuals.

To be quite honest they missed an obvious "nick" by not doing him for a hand written registration number written directly on the white trailer lighting board.

Now, I was sharing this info with everyone to show just how nit picky VOSA are getting. Just think of how many caravans you see every day with the following.
Number plate wedged in the rear window.
Number plate written in marker pens.
Number plate made using self adhesive plate and letters.
Beakaway cables dragging on the road.
Friends borrowing the tow car.
Company cars being used to tow caravans. Does the insurance approve?

To be quite honest I've had 20 years of experience of VOSA and it's predesessor, and the amount of times I had to enlighten them and legally contest trailer towing issues is too neumerous to keep count of.
One other instance was when I got quite rightly done for not having a tachograph in my VW LT35 while towing a trailer as it took the gross train to 5500Kgs. However by getting a tacho fitted within 48 Hrs of being stopped impressed the director of public prosecutions enough for the charges to be dropped to a written formal warning.
 
Mar 14, 2005
9,703
602
30,935
lutzschelisch.wix.com
steveinleo said:
Trailer issue.
1/ Trailers towed behind cars using the 50mm ball or eye and drop pin hitch are not registered seperately in the uk. There is a prohibition document covering trailers specifically and a seperate document for vehicles. VOSA issued a vehicle prohibition against the car but not the trailer for a fault on the trailer. (I've seen the documents now).
Whether trailers are registered or not, they are still vehicles, just like bicycles, sledges, rockets, etc., etc.
The definition of a vehicle is anything that is designed to transport persons or objects.
Cars are motor vehicles or self-propelled vehicles.
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
Regardless of MOTs for trailers or otherwise, braked trailers and there components must be in a serviceable condition including the handbrake function.

The law would not allow you to use chocks in the event of handbrake failure, due to a worn ratchet or missing component on your car, and would indeed constitute an MOT failure, and the same rules apply to any trailer that is attached to your car.

You have had twenty years exp of VOSA, but you drove a vehicle 2 tonnes over the allowed weight limit with no tachograph fitted??? Amazing, no wonder you have had so much to do with VOSA if you have such disregard for the law.
 
Aug 11, 2010
1,362
0
0
Visit site
Hi steve. with regards your insurance answer. Therefore the driver was not insured to drive that vehicle for work purposes. He was only entitled to drive it on his own policy through its third party cover,as a normal vehicle.

For him to be insured for business or commercial use, he needs to be a named driver on that vehicles policy, [which he was not] or have a business or commercial insurance himself [which he did not] There are no two ways about that.

Since March of this year VOSA now have officers that can stop you without the use of the police, they are at this moment having a crackdown specifically on insurance issues, not only on hgv but as you have stated vans/cars pulling trailers that seem to be for commercial use.

You BIL was lucky lucky he didnt loose his temper otherwise you would be reporting a different tale....
 
Aug 4, 2004
4,343
1
0
Visit site
Would VOSA be allowed to interfere with a car's running system like removing the fuel filter to get a sample? Even a MOT engineer canniot do that unless yu give him permssion and it woudl nto be in the course of the MOT I would imagine.
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
Hi Surfer, the answer to that would be yes, if they have reason to believe you are running on red diesel where no duty has been paid.
Have you ever been stopped by customs when returning from abroad? if you are unlucky enough to have been, and they suspect all is not as it should be, they will take your car to pieces.
 
Dec 11, 2009
632
0
18,880
Visit site
I don’t think VOSA are interested whether or not you are running on “red” diesel, it’s a customs issue. At a regular Vosa check point near me there is always a customs and excise “road fuel testing” van checking the fuel. Vosa are only worried about the road worthiness of the vehicles
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
chrisbee 1 said:
I don’t think VOSA are interested whether or not you are running on “red” diesel, it’s a customs issue. At a regular Vosa check point near me there is always a customs and excise “road fuel testing” van checking the fuel. Vosa are only worried about the road worthiness of the vehicles

Quite correct Chris, but VOSA and the police will check the contents of your tank, and if found to be illigal will pass there findings on to custom and excise, who will carry out there own investigation and asses what back duty is payable.
 

602

May 25, 2009
464
0
0
Visit site
Hi,
Older trailers used an over-run brake for when the vehicle is moving. The for parking the trailer, you pull the handbrake with one hand, and flip the "sprag" into the ratchet with the other hand. I don't know if there is legislation requiring this system to be up-dated.
As you say, a break-away cable would be pointess for this system, and personally (not knowing better), I would use a secondary attachment in the form of a chain, short enough to stop the front of the trailer hitting the road, as required on unbraked trailers, which is NOT a break-away cable.
Your insurance certificate tells you what you can and cannot drive (for 3rd party purposes only). If you certificate says you are covered, then you are covered. If you don't have a certificate, then you are not covered, even if your insurers say that you are .... even if they say it in court. Your policy document details your own damage contract. My insurers have told me that I am covered to drive any other vehicle, even if it is not insured in its own right. Other insurers adopt a different policy. Google Road Traffic Act 1988, scroll to Para 148 (I think) where it gives a long list of reasons why the insurers cannot avoid meeting third party claims. I think the list includes "load being carried" and "use of vehicle". Even if you are stoned out of your mind, you are insured ........ but forget your own damage payout.
If the police wish to search your house, they need a search warrant. C&E officers have that facility built into their warrent card .... or so I'm told.
I've also been told that the police can divert you into a VED check point, but you are not required to stay there. I do not feel inclined to put that to the test.
602

 
Aug 4, 2004
4,343
1
0
Visit site
cookieones said:
chrisbee 1 said:
I don’t think VOSA are interested whether or not you are running on “red” diesel, it’s a customs issue. At a regular Vosa check point near me there is always a customs and excise “road fuel testing” van checking the fuel. Vosa are only worried about the road worthiness of the vehicles
Quite correct Chris, but VOSA and the police will check the contents of your tank, and if found to be illigal will pass there findings on to custom and excise, who will carry out there own investigation and asses what back duty is payable.

Could be interesting if you are running on veggie oil!
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
As Parksey has posted in another thread, veggie oil or home produced bio diesel is not necesarity illegal in road going vehicles. However it depends on the quantity of fuel used which determins if fuel duty becomes payable, and I belive the figure 2500 litres.
 

Parksy

Moderator
Nov 12, 2009
11,904
2,399
40,935
Visit site
Prof John L said:
As Parksey has posted in another thread, veggie oil or home produced bio diesel is not necessarily illegal in road going vehicles. However it depends on the quantity of fuel used which determines if fuel duty becomes payable, and I believe the figure 2500 litres.

The figure is 2500 litres per year John. The reality is that Customs are not particularly interested in the guy who puts vegetable oil in his old 4x4 but those who produce Bio Fuel commercially are liable for excise duty.
Going back to Steve in Leo's topic, there must have been something about the outfit that caught the eye of the VOSA inspectors.
Many insurance polices stipulate that the policy is for social domestic and pleasure purposes. What was your bro in law going to do with the trailer? If there is something that the wheeltappers don't like the look of they will pick up on it and prosecute where necessary or issue a prohibition notice.
Most police officers will routinely check for red diesel whenever they stop a diesel powered vehicle and so do VOSA inspectors.
I'm glad to see that the police and VOSA guys are doing what we pay them to do via our taxes, checking vehicle safety sorting out the uninsured toerags who force the price of everybody elses insurance policy up, same with the diesel. I have to pay the full whack to run my car so why should the wide boys get away with it?
If your relative is all above board and kosher then fair play to him, it cost him a few minutes of his time so he shouldn't have a problem with it but I'd like to see more checks on trailers, caravans, commercial vehicles etc. They can check my outfit any time and they will find nothing wrong.
smiley-innocent.gif
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
Parksy - Moderator said:
Prof John L said:
As Parksey has posted in another thread, veggie oil or home produced bio diesel is not necessarily illegal in road going vehicles. However it depends on the quantity of fuel used which determines if fuel duty becomes payable, and I believe the figure 2500 litres.

The figure is 2500 litres per year John. The reality is that Customs are not particularly interested in the guy who puts vegetable oil in his old 4x4 but those who produce Bio Fuel commercially are liable for excise duty.
Going back to Steve in Leo's topic, there must have been something about the outfit that caught the eye of the VOSA inspectors.
Many insurance polices stipulate that the policy is for social domestic and pleasure purposes. What was your bro in law going to do with the trailer? If there is something that the wheeltappers don't like the look of they will pick up on it and prosecute where necessary or issue a prohibition notice.
Most police officers will routinely check for red diesel whenever they stop a diesel powered vehicle and so do VOSA inspectors.
I'm glad to see that the police and VOSA guys are doing what we pay them to do via our taxes, checking vehicle safety sorting out the uninsured toerags who force the price of everybody elses insurance policy up, same with the diesel. I have to pay the full whack to run my car so why should the wide boys get away with it?
If your relative is all above board and kosher then fair play to him, it cost him a few minutes of his time so he shouldn't have a problem with it but I'd like to see more checks on trailers, caravans, commercial vehicles etc. They can check my outfit any time and they will find nothing wrong.
smiley-innocent.gif

I echo your sentiments entirely Parksy, during my time on the road whenever stopped by the ministry / police, I complied with there requests in a polite and civil manor and never encountered any problems, after all they are there to ensure ours and others safety on the public highways.
I also had a lot of dealings with the RTA vehicle inspectors, who were normally ex ministry boys, and believe me where vehicle compliance was concerned nothing passed there nose.
Just seems to me that a lot of individuals have a problem with any one who has a position of authority, like you say if you are legal you have nothing to worry about.
 
Mar 14, 2005
17,557
3,051
50,935
Visit site
Thanks Parksy for the clarification.

I do wonder how they will know how much veggie oil you may have used.

But the difference is with Red diesel is that marker is persistent, and the offence is using untaxed diesel fuel, so even if its just 1 litre in 1000 if they detect the marker your guilty.
 
May 21, 2008
2,463
0
0
Visit site
In reference to the insurance issue.

My policy is probably about as clear as most you find. All that swift cover state is that you may drive a vehicle which is not owned by you or hired to you so long as the vehicle is correctly insured. The cover provided will be third party mininal cover as dictated by law. This now brings a very interesting point. Are you insuring the car or the person? !!
The car was correctly insured as in being insured for business use. The driver at the time was insured and believed that he could drive the car as it didn't belong to him or hired to him in any way. He thought the third party cover position didn't specifically exclude a vehicle already insured for business use. Now being quite honest, I have driven that car all be it, without the trailer, and in January this year I borrowed his 4 x 4 double cab pick up to move our caravan in the snow. Both believing that our insurances were correct.

I agree whole heartedly with Parkesy. I have to pay at the pump for my diesel like anyone else. I would actually welcome the road tax being put onto fuel so that everyone and I mean everyone, paid their fair share. Red diesel could be abolished and the farmers and the like who use red diesel could claim back a rebate on their income tax forms. But then that would open a can of worms for them! They're the only group of businessmen who can pay themselves under £10'000 per annum, work 16 hrs a day, but still have a new disco for the shopping car and a range rover for weekends every year put down as business vehicles, but not be taxed on them as company cars. I have to provide recipts for fuel in my car for busines and personal use, to validate my tax returns.

Cookies, when I started towing behind our truck back in 1985, I actually asked our local Vehicle inspection station if I needed a tacho when towing the trailer. They said no. So having spoken to the guy's who MOT lorries for a living I thought I was ok. As you can tell in the previous comments, I immediately got a tachograph fitted. Hence not being prosecuted. That was back in the days when common sense was about.

Under trailer construction guidelines, if the trailer weighs less than 100Kgs unladen, brakes are not required at all. Trailers up to 750Kgs gross weight but more than 100Kgs unladen, require road brakes that operate on the over run brake principle. 60s has hit the nail on the head on the hitch design that was being used, and yes, they should of had a safety chain fitted.

I'm going to help my in-laws to dispute the insurance issue, as there is a £200 fine and 4 points at stake for the driver. But I would urge everyone to check their policies to ensure they don't get caught out.
 

Parksy

Moderator
Nov 12, 2009
11,904
2,399
40,935
Visit site
steveinleo said:
First off they got him for driving the Espace taking his errection gang of 6 blokes to the job site. Although technically, he was driving to his place of work and not charging the people for using his car.
steveinleo said:
The car was correctly insured as in being insured for business use. The driver at the time was insured and believed that he could drive the car as it didn't belong to him or hired to him in any way. He thought the third party cover position didn't specifically exclude a vehicle already insured for business use.
If this vehicle was correctly insured for business use then it wouldn't matter where he was driving and the usual 'for hire or reward' policy clause wouldn't be relevant. Is your bil's brother employed by this business?
It might prove to be an expensive drive for both your b.i.l and his brother because if they can prove that the brother who was driving had no insurance cover to drive this vehicle then your b.i.l might be charged with permitting his vehicle to be driven without insurance
smiley-frown.gif

As you said, the relatives ought to have checked rather than take a chance. Let us know how it goes Steve, if it goes against the brothers I could always alter the title of the topic to:
'My In Laws ain't as clever as they think they are'
lol.gif
 
Mar 14, 2005
663
0
0
Visit site
steveinleo said:
In reference to the insurance issue.

My policy is probably about as clear as most you find. All that swift cover state is that you may drive a vehicle which is not owned by you or hired to you so long as the vehicle is correctly insured. The cover provided will be third party mininal cover as dictated by law. This now brings a very interesting point. Are you insuring the car or the person? !!
The car was correctly insured as in being insured for business use. The driver at the time was insured and believed that he could drive the car as it didn't belong to him or hired to him in any way. He thought the third party cover position didn't specifically exclude a vehicle already insured for business use. Now being quite honest, I have driven that car all be it, without the trailer, and in January this year I borrowed his 4 x 4 double cab pick up to move our caravan in the snow. Both believing that our insurances were correct.

I agree whole heartedly with Parkesy. I have to pay at the pump for my diesel like anyone else. I would actually welcome the road tax being put onto fuel so that everyone and I mean everyone, paid their fair share. Red diesel could be abolished and the farmers and the like who use red diesel could claim back a rebate on their income tax forms. But then that would open a can of worms for them! They're the only group of businessmen who can pay themselves under £10'000 per annum, work 16 hrs a day, but still have a new disco for the shopping car and a range rover for weekends every year put down as business vehicles, but not be taxed on them as company cars. I have to provide recipts for fuel in my car for busines and personal use, to validate my tax returns.

Cookies, when I started towing behind our truck back in 1985, I actually asked our local Vehicle inspection station if I needed a tacho when towing the trailer. They said no. So having spoken to the guy's who MOT lorries for a living I thought I was ok. As you can tell in the previous comments, I immediately got a tachograph fitted. Hence not being prosecuted. That was back in the days when common sense was about.

Under trailer construction guidelines, if the trailer weighs less than 100Kgs unladen, brakes are not required at all. Trailers up to 750Kgs gross weight but more than 100Kgs unladen, require road brakes that operate on the over run brake principle. 60s has hit the nail on the head on the hitch design that was being used, and yes, they should of had a safety chain fitted.

I'm going to help my in-laws to dispute the insurance issue, as there is a £200 fine and 4 points at stake for the driver. But I would urge everyone to check their policies to ensure they don't get caught out.

"Cookies, when I started towing behind our truck back in 1985, I actually asked our local Vehicle inspection station if I needed a tacho when towing the trailer. They said no. So having spoken to the guy's who MOT lorries for a living I thought I was ok. As you can tell in the previous comments, I immediately got a tachograph fitted. Hence not being prosecuted. That was back in the days when common sense was about"
Your Garage is there to conduct MOT`s,. not quote the law on tacographs, the information they gave you was clearly wrong, also as being a HGV Licence holder yourself this should have been common knoledge to you.

"
"Under trailer construction guidelines, if the trailer weighs less than 100Kgs unladen, brakes are not required at all. Trailers up to 750Kgs gross weight but more than 100Kgs unladen, require road brakes that operate on the over run brake principle. 60s has hit the nail on the head on the hitch design that was being used, and yes, they should of had a safety chain fitted".

If you tow a small trailer without brakes, the weight of the trailer is limited to 50% of the kerb weight of the car or 750kg, whichever is less.

But where fitted must be in a servicable working condition, in your BIL case brakes are clearly not reqired, so the easiest option would be to remove them.
 
May 21, 2008
2,463
0
0
Visit site
I do agree Parkesy, in principle.
BUT, as the vehicle is a car derived vehicle and insured as a business vehicle a vast number of people would drive it assuming that their own policy allowed third party risk's cover. I've fired an E-mail to my insurer to as the specific question. The reason why I'm letting everyone know about this situation is that there are an awfull lot of people using company supplied cars to tow caravans, and this issue of just who is covered to drive what, will be a bone of contention between VOSA, employer's insurers and the family of the car driver. An example of which happened to my parents back in the late 60's when my mum was driving the company car belonging to my dad's employer. She had a collision in a country lane on ice. When my dad told his employer, they had to say my dad was driving as it turned out that only employee's were covered on the company car policy and it didn't include spouse's.
I agree with cookies that they probably would of been better to of not had brakes at all. My 6ft x 4ft trailer has a 750 Kg hitch fitted and no brakes fitted and I have a breakaway chain fitted too. BTW, I didn't go to the local garage for info on tachographs, but went to the HGV vehicle testing station as the truck when new was hgv plate tested as it was back in 1986.

That aside cookies. Once I'd clarified with West Midland Traffic Authority the operators license regs as when I was spot checked after the tacho was fitted, the claim then was I needed an operator's license. WMTA said we didn't need one as the trailer was under 1000Kgs unladen. I had to get them to put that in writing so that a copy of that could be put into the vehicle as it was being stopped regularly for "spot checks". Then of cause when I showed the policeman the letter upon being stopped I often got called a "smart arse" or accused of swallowing the rule book! So you can't even be right when you've got the info straight from the rule makers and put down in black &white.
 

602

May 25, 2009
464
0
0
Visit site
Hi,
But if you remove the breaking system, you can only tow the trailer with a car that has an ULW which is twice the MGW of the trailer. So an unbraked 750kg MGW trailer needs a 1500kg ULW tow car.
Question. Is a trailer handbrake a "secondary braking system"? I mean, you are unlikely to use it in an emergency. Doh! That has probably opened another can of pedantic worms.
602
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts