Discussion
Prizam said:
Anyone remember the 80's? I guess its a miracle that the human race survived!
I don't think what he did was a good idea, but banned for 10 years and a jail sentence for trying to make a few extra quid? Seems a little excessive when aggravated burglary seems to get no interest at all.
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-he... for what can happen when a lorry driver isn't paying full attention to the road. The statement "premeditated dangerous driving" and the punishment seem spot on to me.I don't think what he did was a good idea, but banned for 10 years and a jail sentence for trying to make a few extra quid? Seems a little excessive when aggravated burglary seems to get no interest at all.
Only 12 weeks in chokey. Are judges getting softer?
This guy got 30 for merely fiddling records rather than making potentially dangerous manipulations to his vehicle.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...
This guy got 30 for merely fiddling records rather than making potentially dangerous manipulations to his vehicle.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...
Red Devil said:
Only 12 weeks in chokey. Are judges getting softer?
This guy got 30 for merely fiddling records rather than making potentially dangerous manipulations to his vehicle.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...
Is that all you can drive 9 hours a day? This guy got 30 for merely fiddling records rather than making potentially dangerous manipulations to his vehicle.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...
Prizam said:
ghe13rte said:
Maybe you would have a different view if said driver was off his tits on amphetamine and had just driven a 40-tonner over some of your family. Hey-Ho, what's the point of prevention...why not just lock these guys up after they have killed a dozen people in their quest for a few extra quid.
Didnt say it was right, i said it was disproportionate and he was being made an example of.Pilots who turn up drunk get less.
There are 2 elements to deterrence, one is the severity of the punishment the second the likelihood of detection. Hants Police and DVSA publishing this puts out a clear message to those manipulating the driver records of HGVs.
The sensor is deep within the guts of the HGV and difficult to inspect. DVSA also will have issues about taking HGVs off the road when they are carrying valuable cargo with operating and commercial deadlines to meet. Imagine the kerfuffle at truckHQ when they get a message their man and load are in an inspection bay for the next 6 hours...with their driver hours running out.
Staring down the barrel of an oncoming 40-tonner is no fun, doing so with a tired driver is not top of my list of companions on the road.
I wonder who Bob-the-driver is getting to make these dodgy sender units.
Don't get those saying a higher sentence is warranted because of what might have happened. Surely you can only be punished for what you have done. Otherwise everyone charged with speeding or being over the drink drive limit should also be imprisoned and banned for 10 years because of what might have happened.
sas62 said:
Don't get those saying a higher sentence is warranted because of what might have happened. Surely you can only be punished for what you have done. Otherwise everyone charged with speeding or being over the drink drive limit should also be imprisoned and banned for 10 years because of what might have happened.
Are you one of those who only accept someone can be charged with dangerous driving if they have had an accident as a result?ghe13rte said:
sas62 said:
Don't get those saying a higher sentence is warranted because of what might have happened. Surely you can only be punished for what you have done. Otherwise everyone charged with speeding or being over the drink drive limit should also be imprisoned and banned for 10 years because of what might have happened.
Are you one of those who only accept someone can be charged with dangerous driving if they have had an accident as a result?Dangerous driving is a crime with its own charging recommendations.
What you can't do is increase the punishment because they might have killed someone.
The possible outcomes of dangerous driving are pretty much the same as the original post yet you don't often see a ten year ban and prison time.
sas62 said:
Err thats the complete opposite of what I'm saying.
Dangerous driving is a crime with its own charging recommendations.
What you can't do is increase the punishment because they might have killed someone.
The possible outcomes of dangerous driving are pretty much the same as the original post yet you don't often see a ten year ban and prison time.
I suspect the sentence isn't because of what could have happened, it's that the laws he has broken give the judge the power is issue such a sentence. 3 separate fraud convictions as mentioned by HantsRat.Dangerous driving is a crime with its own charging recommendations.
What you can't do is increase the punishment because they might have killed someone.
The possible outcomes of dangerous driving are pretty much the same as the original post yet you don't often see a ten year ban and prison time.
The last tweet was more opinion of the person on the twitter account than anything to do with law.
mac96 said:
Seems entirely reasonable that he should not be doing driving jobs for a long time.
My only complaint about this would be that his manager/employer should probably have been with him in the dock.
I agree and I actually know the DVSA officer that caught this truck.My only complaint about this would be that his manager/employer should probably have been with him in the dock.
It was a foreign registered vehicle which is why they went to seize the truck too, so that the operator had some sort of loss, as they can't prosecute someone in another country.
Won't do a whole lot in grand scheme of things but its just cost the operator a truck so if he wants to do it again he needs to buy another.
One of the weeks that the driver has got in jail is also in lieu of paying the fine as the driver has pleaded poverty and they cant seize his funds that are abroad.
captainaverage said:
What's a sender unit? Why was his abs affected etc? Please explain what is going on? Thanks.
Obviously its already been answered below the rest of it but the reason his abs etc is affected is that the manipulation device also causes the lorry to think it is stationary, this is so that the lorry miles still match the miles the tacho thinks the lorry has done, when these are out then its obvious what has happened (also why its not just as easy as finding the fuse to turn the tacho off)Because the truck computer thinks its stationary then it cant work out the wheel is skidding and correctly apply the ABS.
Edited by ymwoods on Friday 23 February 23:54
https://www.rtitb.co.uk/news/driver-banned-for-21-...
This is basically the same thing, tacho is there is regulate your hours.
You start bending the rules then your going to get done.
I drive one, we ve all seen what happens when one gets crashed, the M1 crash where 8 died the bloke from behind (fedex truck) was on his phone (Bluetooth) and just ploughed straight in the back of a stationary vehicle.
So how many of us talk on the phone and just lose concentration and not even realise? that FedEx driver is defo going to jail.
When all told and im not sticking up for mr fedex, if the guy that had parked in lane one of an unlit section of the M1 with no lights on, then none of the above would have happened.
I have no sympathy for Lorry drivers bending the rules, we all know we get bad press when theres been a crash involving one as the clear up can take ages.
You get 3 x 9 hours and 2 x 10 hour drives a week, but you can only do a total of 90 hours driving over a fort night.
Age old saying if the wheels aint moving the trucks not earning.
This is basically the same thing, tacho is there is regulate your hours.
You start bending the rules then your going to get done.
I drive one, we ve all seen what happens when one gets crashed, the M1 crash where 8 died the bloke from behind (fedex truck) was on his phone (Bluetooth) and just ploughed straight in the back of a stationary vehicle.
So how many of us talk on the phone and just lose concentration and not even realise? that FedEx driver is defo going to jail.
When all told and im not sticking up for mr fedex, if the guy that had parked in lane one of an unlit section of the M1 with no lights on, then none of the above would have happened.
I have no sympathy for Lorry drivers bending the rules, we all know we get bad press when theres been a crash involving one as the clear up can take ages.
You get 3 x 9 hours and 2 x 10 hour drives a week, but you can only do a total of 90 hours driving over a fort night.
Age old saying if the wheels aint moving the trucks not earning.
BugLebowski said:
I wonder if he was a foreign national? It would explain why they didn't just bail him to appear in court.
This below would suggest that is the case. I don't think many UK truck drivers secrete all their lucre in a foreign country.ymwoods said:
One of the weeks that the driver has got in jail is also in lieu of paying the fine as the driver has pleaded poverty and they cant seize his funds that are abroad.
sas62 said:
Don't get those saying a higher sentence is warranted because of what might have happened. Surely you can only be punished for what you have done. Otherwise everyone charged with speeding or being over the drink drive limit should also be imprisoned and banned for 10 years because of what might have happened.
Think of it this way.A drink driver is equivalent to a soldier being over limit and having to shoot the enemy but might end up shooting a civilian because he/she is intoxicated.
The truck driver is equivalent to an alcohol addict who gets someone to hack the software of a computerised breathalyser so that he can carry on drinking, pass the test, go to his job operating a drone for air strikes.
The latter has gone a bit further than seeing if he can get away with a little tipple. He knows he's going to do it all the time, intentional finds a way to bypass the system then operates machinery which can cause much wider damage.
Surely that warrants a higher sentence.
DVSA and Trafpol know that these devices are being used , proving that they are fitted and being used has until very recently been very difficult.
It is a constant battle finding the latest scams to beat the recorders .
Apart from the fudging of drivers hours these devices are also used to obtain more speed , the limit is 90kph but I have had trucks blow past me going up hills at far above 90 .
This can also disable many other safety systems on the trucks .
Driving certain routes to and from ferry ports at night is like a truck grand prix !
We know many of them are running bent , this court case will be hitting all the truck sites and media formats , the authorities will hope it deters a few and puts the message out that they know how to detect the devices . Hopefully the seizures of trucks and trailers will make the operator think long and hard as these rigs are a very large investment. I am not up to date on modern prices but in the 90s a top of the range Scania or Volvo was best part of £100k with a top class fridge trailer another £70k add in £7k of accessories ( lights , exhaust, alloy wheels or stainless wheel trims for the trailer) .
It is a constant battle finding the latest scams to beat the recorders .
Apart from the fudging of drivers hours these devices are also used to obtain more speed , the limit is 90kph but I have had trucks blow past me going up hills at far above 90 .
This can also disable many other safety systems on the trucks .
Driving certain routes to and from ferry ports at night is like a truck grand prix !
We know many of them are running bent , this court case will be hitting all the truck sites and media formats , the authorities will hope it deters a few and puts the message out that they know how to detect the devices . Hopefully the seizures of trucks and trailers will make the operator think long and hard as these rigs are a very large investment. I am not up to date on modern prices but in the 90s a top of the range Scania or Volvo was best part of £100k with a top class fridge trailer another £70k add in £7k of accessories ( lights , exhaust, alloy wheels or stainless wheel trims for the trailer) .
grumpy52 said:
DVSA and Trafpol know that these devices are being used , proving that they are fitted and being used has until very recently been very difficult.
It is a constant battle finding the latest scams to beat the recorders .
Apart from the fudging of drivers hours these devices are also used to obtain more speed , the limit is 90kph but I have had trucks blow past me going up hills at far above 90 .
This can also disable many other safety systems on the trucks .
Driving certain routes to and from ferry ports at night is like a truck grand prix !
We know many of them are running bent , this court case will be hitting all the truck sites and media formats , the authorities will hope it deters a few and puts the message out that they know how to detect the devices . Hopefully the seizures of trucks and trailers will make the operator think long and hard as these rigs are a very large investment. I am not up to date on modern prices but in the 90s a top of the range Scania or Volvo was best part of £100k with a top class fridge trailer another £70k add in £7k of accessories ( lights , exhaust, alloy wheels or stainless wheel trims for the trailer) .
We had 4 new Merc Actros Giga spaces with just a fridge in, No leather no microwave and what ever else and they were 95K each I was led to believe. It is a constant battle finding the latest scams to beat the recorders .
Apart from the fudging of drivers hours these devices are also used to obtain more speed , the limit is 90kph but I have had trucks blow past me going up hills at far above 90 .
This can also disable many other safety systems on the trucks .
Driving certain routes to and from ferry ports at night is like a truck grand prix !
We know many of them are running bent , this court case will be hitting all the truck sites and media formats , the authorities will hope it deters a few and puts the message out that they know how to detect the devices . Hopefully the seizures of trucks and trailers will make the operator think long and hard as these rigs are a very large investment. I am not up to date on modern prices but in the 90s a top of the range Scania or Volvo was best part of £100k with a top class fridge trailer another £70k add in £7k of accessories ( lights , exhaust, alloy wheels or stainless wheel trims for the trailer) .
Or thou just seen on Bookface a local lad is selling an 8 wheeler tipper (Scania) 15 plate for 83k plus VAT with jut shy of 500K on the clock.
Big cash!!!!
So "IF" he was nt English then the operater has no only I presume got to pay to get the truck and load released hes now also got to send a driver over here to fetch it.
Sounds like an expensive job when you consider what he d lose from "in his eyes" from the driver running legal.
nickfrog said:
Do you have any evidence they do ?
Surprisingly, this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39232447Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff