Well at least he wasn't speeding!
Discussion
Struggling to see what is 'shocking' about this.
I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
Tyre Smoke said:
Struggling to see what is 'shocking' about this.
I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
Be honest, what's the likelihood that the geniuses who came up with this are even capable of checking that such a load is properly secured? I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
Tyre Smoke said:
Struggling to see what is 'shocking' about this.
I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
Are you actually serious!I'm also struggling to see (apart from perhaps loading the tree further forward) what is wrong with this.
Providing the load is properly secured and overhangs are marked, and the driver's vision is not impaired, what law is being broken? Apart from vehicle loading limits perhaps?
Monkeylegend said:
And maybe the difficulty in seeing his brake lights if you could see them at all.
Imagine the insurance claim, "I was driving behind a christmas tree which had no brake lights and it stopped suddenly, and I didn't until I hit it"
Indeed, and given that the tree is spilling over the sides of the van, his wing mirrors will be full of tree rather than other vehicles he should be able to see. Caravanners use mirror extensions to overcome this but I don’t see anything on the van. Then there’s the huge change to the driving characteristics of the van given the ridiculous load. The sheer size of the tree will make it much more vulnerable to side winds and the weight of it so high up will raise its centre of gravity, again making it more vulnerable to side winds but also flipping sideways when going round a bend as the van’s suspension and side profile will be well outside their design parameters.Imagine the insurance claim, "I was driving behind a christmas tree which had no brake lights and it stopped suddenly, and I didn't until I hit it"
Tyre Smoke said:
Yes, as I have stated before, as long as no law is being broken, what is wrong with this?
I think you will find that the law IS being broken. The bits of legislation all loads must comply with whether trade or private individuals are The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986, regulation 100 and The Road Traffic Act 1988, section 40a. Look them up. They are short but in essence, the loads must be properly secure, not cause any hazards to anyone and not alter the driving characteristics of the vehicle massively.Hold on. This was caught by Devon and Cornwall police.
Tyre Smoke is in Devon.
The driver was Tyre Smoke!
No, t'wasn't me!
I understand the C+U regs, but providing that tree was loaded and secured correctly, still failing to see what law has been broken?
I appreciate it is far back and not loaded correctly, and the weight on the roof rack may well be exceeded, but if it was positioned further forward and no vision impairment, where's the problem?
Cold said:
sospan said:
What a total idiot the driver is.
Yep, he should taken the back roads home. Much less chance of being photographed then. Then again, it is a VW Transporter, so could be one of those 'lifestyle' types rather than someone who works for a living.
Tyre Smoke said:
No, t'wasn't me!
I understand the C+U regs, but providing that tree was loaded and secured correctly, still failing to see what law has been broken?
I appreciate it is far back and not loaded correctly, and the weight on the roof rack may well be exceeded, but if it was positioned further forward and no vision impairment, where's the problem?
I actually agree with you on your final point: if the driver had loaded the tree in such a way that it wasn't blocking all of his rear lights including brake and position lights, it wasn't impeding his view by blocking the areas covered by the wing mirrors with the branches flapping everywhere, and using an appropriate roof carriage system with secure straps or other fastening methods, there wouldn't have been a problem, even if he had exceeded the roof weight limit. The size of the tree does make it a comical spectacle, but that's not the real issue; the real issue is that the tree isn't securely loaded. The C&U regs, as any other regulations, are statutory instruments meaning that, for all intents and purposes, they are the law. Therefore not complying with them is breaking the law. I suspect someone with legal qualifications can explain that better (or possibly might make that simple explanation totally incomprehensible). I don't deal with C&U Regs but I am responsible for the compliance of my company with Human Medicines Regulations 2012 which is a similar statutory instrument. If we don't comply, we would be breaking the law and could land in jail. You don't have the risk of jail if you don't break the law.
Having said all that, if the driver had loaded the tree securely, it wouldn't have given us something to laugh at...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff