So, I’m not usually one to take the ■■■■ with weight restrictions - I get around my route just fine without taking shortcuts, and to be honest there aren’t many instances where I could save much time by doing so.
However, today I drove down a ‘7.5t access only’ street due to a road closure, without realising I could’ve actually accessed the top of the closed road via another street (new area/route which I’m still learning).
Just my luck to encounter the biggest nimby ever!
I was driving through a bottleneck on said street with cars on both sides, and a car turns in off a cul-de-sac and blocks me as I’m literally about 4 cars from exiting the bottleneck. I thought she hadn’t seen me at first but it quickly became apparent she wasn’t moving.
I hopped out and politely asked if she could back up a few feet as the alternative was me reversing a fair way down a narrow road. She immediately said I shouldn’t be driving down here and was going to report me (took a photo of my reg).
So, I’m ultimately in the wrong as I could’ve avoided this street and I’m wondering what the consequences could be. I was in a dustcart, but it’s a commercial one (not council) and it was around 11:15pm which doesn’t really help. My employer tend to take compliance extremely seriously - immediate sack if caught vaping in truck, must log 15 mins other work at each end of shift, really hot on infringements etc.
Forget about it. There’s no consequences from a member of the public sending a photo in. Has to come from an official source (police, council, trading standards etc) to prosecute for it. Member of the public could have just photo shopped it and sent it in. I’d be taking it it to court and asking them to verify the authenticity of where their evidence came from and they wouldn’t be able to verify anything. I wouldn’t worry at all.
You (your employer) will most likely get a letter asking for reasons why you were there and if your employer is reasonable they should allow the odd minor error and back you up saying basically what you’d just said here.
End of the day we all try to avoid weight limits but in stances like this sometimes you fall on one by pot luck and it’s just safer to go through.
I cant even remember where it was now, Wales somewhere, but theres an industrial estate at the back of some houses I was delivering to which I didn’t like the look of but had signed access for lorries down a residential street, which at the end right before the estate went to a 7.5t limit for about 50yds. Apparently clay pipes under the road. No way out and no advance warning (7.5t in 300yds ets) signed. If I’d have used the previous residential road that didn’t have a HGV sign I’d have been fine. Nothing happened but sometimes it cant be avoided for a number of non intentional reasons.
Rowley010:
Forget about it. There’s no consequences from a member of the public sending a photo in. Has to come from an official source (police, council, trading standards etc) to prosecute for it. Member of the public could have just photo shopped it and sent it in. I’d be taking it it to court and asking them to verify the authenticity of where their evidence came from and they wouldn’t be able to verify anything. I wouldn’t worry at all.
There’s many local “lorry watch” schemes who are essentially members of the public who spend their time doing the above which have led to fines etc being handed out.
There are a couple of “tricks” in your locker for times like this ;
1 - paperwork in your mouth whilst looking like you are actually in the right place, but not too sure where to go
2 - if you actually get stopped, just let them know that you have been directed “down here” by the nice policeman at the top of the road / start of the diversion…
These have kept me out of trouble in the last 40 years
Just don’t stutter or look sad & flakey, just own the situation
Surely common sense will prevail here ffs.
You made a GENUINE mistake, just explain this to your firm and point out why would you choose to run down an unsuitable street with parked cars, when there was a more suitable wider street 2xroads up, other than for not knowing the area.
As for the self appointed traffic police, just disregard them, it’s got the far end of f all to do with that silly cow.
Just approach it with your boss that you are not taking a blocking for a genuine mistake,.and that he should back you up if she takes things further in her sad life.
Tailschwing:
So, I’m not usually one to take the ■■■■ with weight restrictions - I get around my route just fine without taking shortcuts, and to be honest there aren’t many instances where I could save much time by doing so.
However, today I drove down a ‘7.5t access only’ street due to a road closure, without realising I could’ve actually accessed the top of the closed road via another street (new area/route which I’m still learning).
Just my luck to encounter the biggest nimby ever!
I was driving through a bottleneck on said street with cars on both sides, and a car turns in off a cul-de-sac and blocks me as I’m literally about 4 cars from exiting the bottleneck. I thought she hadn’t seen me at first but it quickly became apparent she wasn’t moving.
I hopped out and politely asked if she could back up a few feet as the alternative was me reversing a fair way down a narrow road. She immediately said I shouldn’t be driving down here and was going to report me (took a photo of my reg).
So, I’m ultimately in the wrong as I could’ve avoided this street and I’m wondering what the consequences could be. I was in a dustcart, but it’s a commercial one (not council) and it was around 11:15pm which doesn’t really help. My employer tend to take compliance extremely seriously - immediate sack if caught vaping in truck, must log 15 mins other work at each end of shift, really hot on infringements etc.
Rowley010:
Forget about it. There’s no consequences from a member of the public sending a photo in. Has to come from an official source (police, council, trading standards etc) to prosecute for it. Member of the public could have just photo shopped it and sent it in. I’d be taking it it to court and asking them to verify the authenticity of where their evidence came from and they wouldn’t be able to verify anything. I wouldn’t worry at all.
There’s many local “lorry watch” schemes who are essentially members of the public who spend their time doing the above which have led to fines etc being handed out.
Brings to mind an incident which happened only last week in our place.
Delivering to shops that weve been delivering to for years,in weight limits out of weight limits,NEVER EVER an issue. New driver starts,(ex English supermarket driver trainer/assesor). Out at 4am,lands back to yard with trailer,NO DELIVERIES DONE about 8am. Whats the story asks office boy? Cant do the deliveries ,all in weight restrictions,and the only one that wasnt,I cant get to the goods!
Jesus wept!
Rowley010:
Forget about it. There’s no consequences from a member of the public sending a photo in. Has to come from an official source (police, council, trading standards etc) to prosecute for it. Member of the public could have just photo shopped it and sent it in. I’d be taking it it to court and asking them to verify the authenticity of where their evidence came from and they wouldn’t be able to verify anything. I wouldn’t worry at all.
There’s many local “lorry watch” schemes who are essentially members of the public who spend their time doing the above which have led to fines etc being handed out.
And did anyone dispute them or just pay up?
Dunno. Assuming they paid up as it’s a court decision to prosecute.
I get the feeling that this woman may well complain as she was fuming about having to back up. However, I’m not certain that a pic of the front of my truck in the dark will necessarily be enough to really identify my location. It’s just whether it’s wise to argue the point and refute being there as opposed to just being humble and apologising for a genuine mistake. It’s not really likely that somebody would have bothered to take a photo if I wasn’t in a restricted area is it?
I get the feeling that this woman may well complain as she was fuming about having to back up. However, I’m not certain that a pic of the front of my truck in the dark will necessarily be enough to really identify my location. It’s just whether it’s wise to argue the point and refute being there as opposed to just being humble and apologising for a genuine mistake. It’s not really likely that somebody would have bothered to take a photo if I wasn’t in a restricted area is it?
You’re bothering your arse far too much about this ■■■■ stupid woman mate.
So tf what if she has photographed you,? It was a mistake that anybody could have made.
Concentrate instead on explaining to your firm…not apologising either, as you have already explained the circumstances.
If your firm does not back you over this, over this ■■■■ old busybody, they ain’t worth working for anyway, so just go with it, and see what happens.
If anything did come of it and ask to see the evidence and see if it does actually prove the location or is it just your word against her for which road the photo was taken? If it does prove it then I’d explain why I was there ie mistake. Don’t try saying you weren’t there but for a successful prosecution they need to prove you were with more than her word against yours. So the photo would have to show a distinctive feature on that road if it doesn’t show the road name. Innocent til proven guilty and their evidence has to prove you were on that road. By the sounds of what you’ve said the photo will just show a lorry on a street. That not particular street. What these people need to do is make sure they take the photos at the end of said road and get the road name and the weight limit sign and the lorry having just passed those signs in that same photo. That can’t be argued with. Yours I think can.
Rowley010:
If anything did come of it and ask to see the evidence and see if it does actually prove the location or is it just your word against her for which road the photo was taken? If it does prove it then I’d explain why I was there ie mistake. Don’t try saying you weren’t there but for a successful prosecution they need to prove you were with more than her word against yours. So the photo would have to show a distinctive feature on that road if it doesn’t show the road name. Innocent til proven guilty and their evidence has to prove you were on that road. By the sounds of what you’ve said the photo will just show a lorry on a street. That not particular street. What these people need to do is make sure they take the photos at the end of said road and get the road name and the weight limit sign and the lorry having just passed those signs in that same photo. That can’t be argued with. Yours I think can.
Give her the recognition and creedence of her actions (that in reality have ■■■■ all to do with her) ONLY if it gets to either attention of the Police, or actually taken to court …otherwise he should solely concentrate on why his firm is not on his side over some snouty cow who has nothing to do in her life.
I would be apologising ONLY for the genuine mistake I made, then that done, I’d be demanding that my firm backed me up due to my valid explanation.
These are two situations in this ■■■■ job that do my swede in.
Self appointed traffic Police/grasses.
Firms who will not back up their own drivers, but readily accept any ■■■■ else’s word instead.
It’s the run up to Christmas.
People are fraught and road ragey
and
Far too busy to be looking up where to complain to and send photos etc.
My guess is that she got it off her chest complaining and taking a pic.
I hope so, anyway.
Rowley010:
Forget about it. There’s no consequences from a member of the public sending a photo in. Has to come from an official source (police, council, trading standards etc) to prosecute for it. Member of the public could have just photo shopped it and sent it in. I’d be taking it it to court and asking them to verify the authenticity of where their evidence came from and they wouldn’t be able to verify anything. I wouldn’t worry at all.
There’s many local “lorry watch” schemes who are essentially members of the public who spend their time doing the above which have led to fines etc being handed out.
And did anyone dispute them or just pay up?
Dunno. Assuming they paid up as it’s a court decision to prosecute.
Tab top left is just just one lorry watch scheme that lists prosecutions handed out by court.
Oh yes, Bradford on Avon, there’s always someone there during the day to catch any lorries with more than 2 axles and they get plenty of business, leading to some big fines.
Agreed on Bradford on Avon , there are lorry watchers with too much time on their hands and have spent their kids inheritance and fed up watching This Morning or Loose Women on daytime ITV , have indeed signed up to be road warriors wearing police on their hi vis jackets .
Coffin dodgery at its best .
Pretty sure I saw an old man in high vis ■■■■■■■■■ in Bradford on Avon a while back when what looked like a 26tonner went over the bridge in front of me.
109LWB:
Pretty sure I saw an old man in high vis ■■■■■■■■■ in Bradford on Avon a while back when what looked like a 26tonner went over the bridge in front of me.
.
