17 staff laid off at "Emissions cheating" company

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

Might shut up some of the clever dicks on here…Also a programme on Ch4 Dispatches next Monday about hauliers using these things.

truckingjobs.co.uk/blog/17- … lage-firm/

Most of the staff of a ■■■■■■■■ haulage firm are being laid off, after its transport manager was banned from the industry.

Seventeen drivers, workshop fitters and office staff at Eric Nicholson Transport, in Cockermouth, have been informed they are being made redundant.

Mr Nicholson, who has been in the haulage business for 40 years, said: "We had absolutely no choice but to make pretty much all the staff redundant.

"It was soul-destroying. Some of these guys have worked for us coming up 40 years.

“We have made 17 staff redundant but are hoping to employ everyone up until May 10 when the licence goes.”

Mr Nicholson tried to get around emissions controls by fitting cheat devices on up to 16 vehicles. Following a public inquiry, his firm will lose its licence in May and will be disqualified from operating vehicles for five years.

He has appealed the decision.

“I wasn’t expecting to lose my licence completely. I was taken aback by the decision,” he said.

Mr Nicholson, who is an Allerdale and town councillor for Cockermouth and was on ■■■■■■■ County Council for 20 years, said he’d made the biggest mistake of his life in arranging for someone to fit the devices.

2

I just CBA fitting one, really don’t see the point in the big scheme of things.

3

Chickens will come home to roost. Fitting of some devices seem to accelerate the process.!

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

4

Whilst I’m in favour of everybody playing by the rules I can see the temptation to by-pas/get rid of emissions gubbins. It’s not the cost of ad-blu. It’s the constant faults that seem to plague the systems, it doesn’t matter which make of vehicle we run, there always seems to be 2/3 times a week when somebody phones a engine warning light fault /emissions fault requiring a usually day long (and expensive ) visit to a dealer while they “fix” it. Plans thrown into chaos usually ensue. If they could just get the bloody things to work properly!

5

Serves him right tbh, though it does probably highlight how close a margin some companies work to

Mr Nicholson, who has been in the haulage business for 40 years, said: "We had absolutely no choice but to make pretty much all the staff redundant.

He had the choice not to do the fitting in the first place! Article also said his son was setting up a new company for the coal side , why not for the whole lot?

"It was soul-destroying. Some of these guys have worked for us coming up 40 years.

So he risked the livelihood of his staff? How many though I wonder knew about the devices being fitted? If they did then they’re as guilty so can’t complain now redundant

He has appealed the decision.

Best luck with that!

“I wasn’t expecting to lose my licence completely. I was taken aback by the decision,” he said.

Mr Nicholson said he’d made the biggest mistake of his life in arranging for someone to fit the devices.

To me this says he knew exactly what he did and thought it’s just a slap on wrist when, not if, I get caught.

Me thinks he wasn’t that taken aback with the decision!

I hope they also go after whoever fitted them as well.

Somewhere there will be innocent in this who’ve lost their job but as I said above there’ll be a fair few who knew what had been done

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

6

I think this is way over the top,if I’m right he runs dafs & they can be a nightmare with adblue problems
So they close down a firm running for 40 years who as far as I know did not break any other rules.
They need to look at a few of these big firms and see them breaking drivers hours rules as from my experience they are the worst at it and that puts people’s safety at risk a lot more than fitting emissions devices…

7

I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

8

The powers that be should be looking at why add blue systems don’t work properly and compensating hauliers and prosecuting manufactures .

9

albion:
I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

10

I think Mr Nicholson…

Is throwing the baby out with the bath water. It’s a family run firm and there is every opportunity to phoenix the company. The classic, wife becomes director and husband becomes company secretary scenario.

It doesn’t matter to him at all if the firm survives, he’s already made his money and doesn’t have to work again. He knowingly tried to cheat the system. A system that tries ensure fair play between hauliers and levels the playing field.

In my opinion it’s a selfish reaction to being caught with his pants down and attempt to try and coerse the decision that’s gone against him. Statements like “I wasn’t expecting to lose my licence completely. I was taken aback by the decision,” simply expose him for the cheat he is.

It’s a crying shame that the drivers, some of whom will have known and others who won’t have, that they’re down the road looking for a job.

11

Darkside:
But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

You could say pretty much on a parallel with what Volkswagen were doing, getting around somewhat theoretical emissions standards, and what happened to them, nothing in Europe.

I am not against trying to stop pollution but IMHO this technology, and legislation, is being pushed too far, too fast by the motor manufacturers in the interests of selling more vehicles.

12

Instead of knocking Nicholson, we should be asking about the validity of yet another ott ■■■■ stupid (arguably needless) regulation in this ■■■■ ed up industry.
To use an analogy, to explain all this crap, it’s like a field that needs the grass cut down.

In the 60s and 70s free for all, the grass was out of control, 6 foot, high, it needed to be cut for image and safety.
(In literal terms of emissions, no argument from me on that)
In the 80s a little better.

In the 90s it was 6 inches high, …so much much better.

Then came the 00s, with new regs, so it became Championship football field quality which was good enough and achieved their aims.
(for those who don’t know wtf I’m on about the emissions were cut down to a much safer and adequate level)
…but no, Then it had to be Premier league pitch quality, still not good enough.

So now they want it Golf open championship putting green quality…WTF FOR exactly?
To appease the Greens and the Leftie ‘‘Right on’’ types.
So now people are losing their life long jobs.
Good old UK eh? :smiling_imp: :unamused:

Trucks are as clean running as they will ever be, enough is enough, I’m just pleased I no longer own one.

13

Darkside:

albion:
I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

Well as Nolans proves, you don’t get shut down for hours offences - though I’d argue that for the breadth and scope of their failings, they should have been.

Whilst their is a commercial advantage to all three, adblue cheating/skimping on maintenance/hours abuses, the latter two have potentially more serious consequences. As I say, I’m not against punishment, just that I think pulling the O license was overly harsh in the circumstances.

We’ll have to agree to disagree :slight_smile:

14

robroy:
Instead of knocking Nicholson, we should be asking about the validity of yet another ott [zb] stupid (arguably needless) regulation in this [zb] ed up industry.
To use an analogy, to explain all this crap, it’s like a field that needs the grass cut down.

In the 60s and 70s free for all, the grass was out of control, 6 foot, high, it needed to be cut for image and safety.
(In literal terms of emissions, no argument from me on that)
In the 80s a little better.

In the 90s it was 6 inches high, …so much much better.

Then came the 00s, with new regs, so it became Championship football field quality which was good enough and achieved their aims.
(for those who don’t know wtf I’m on about the emissions were cut down to a much safer and adequate level)
…but no, Then it had to be Premier league pitch quality, still not good enough.

So now they want it Golf open championship putting green quality…WTF FOR exactly?
To appease the Greens and the Leftie ‘‘Right on’’ types.
So now people are losing their life long jobs.
Good old UK eh? :smiling_imp: :unamused:

Trucks are as clean running as they will ever be, enough is enough, I’m just pleased I no longer own one.

I know what you mean, and to be fair I wasn’t Nicholson directly. Years back I did enough work out of there place, and alongside them from Longtown.

As you used a grass analogy Rob, can I use a football analogy? I know being a Magpie’s fan you don’t really follow football, but bear with me :smiley: …

In the 60’s and 70’s football was a man’s game, anything went to get the ball in the net.

Nowadays, tackling from behind is banned, the stadiums are family friendly, now cameras are being introduced to help the ref :unamused:

HOWEVER crap the game has got, if you still want to play, you have to obey the rules.

15

albion:

Darkside:

albion:
I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

Well as Nolans proves, you don’t get shut down for hours offences - though I’d argue that for the breadth and scope of their failings, they should have been.

Whilst their is a commercial advantage to all three, adblue cheating/skimping on maintenance/hours abuses, the latter two have potentially more serious consequences. As I say, I’m not against punishment, just that I think pulling the O license was overly harsh in the circumstances.

We’ll have to agree to disagree :slight_smile:

Only on a coffee break so can’t give a fuller reply, but I think you’re wrong on this one.
Think more if pollution as being like cigarettes. The effects are less immediate than a car crash but are ■■■■■■■■■■ and just as deadly.

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

16

Franglais:

albion:

Darkside:

albion:
I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

Well as Nolans proves, you don’t get shut down for hours offences - though I’d argue that for the breadth and scope of their failings, they should have been.

Whilst their is a commercial advantage to all three, adblue cheating/skimping on maintenance/hours abuses, the latter two have potentially more serious consequences. As I say, I’m not against punishment, just that I think pulling the O license was overly harsh in the circumstances.

We’ll have to agree to disagree :slight_smile:

Only on a coffee break so can’t give a fuller reply, but I think you’re wrong on this one.
Think more if pollution as being like cigarettes. The effects are less immediate than a car crash but are ■■■■■■■■■■ and just as deadly.

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

I knew someone would come up with that, should have know it would be you :laughing:

Whilst you are right, those emissions are going to only play a small part (if any), in death and disease, unlike brakes failing on a hill in Bath for example. It’s a bit like manslaughter and murder, there are degrees and on my spectrum, this isn’t a big drama.

17

There were other issues at the company concerned as well.

So far as I know, when an emulator is found on a vehicle, a fleet inspection follows.

This often uncovers other issues regarding maintenance or hours.

IMO instead of showboating over the truck price fixing cartel, the RHA would have done better to take the truck manufacturers to task over mechanical issues…(MAN, DAF etc).

18

Whilst you are right, those emissions are going to only play a small part (if any), in death and disease, unlike brakes failing on a hill in Bath for example. It’s a bit like manslaughter and murder, there are degrees and on my spectrum, this isn’t a big drama.

I agree totally, BUT the world has changed now. Don’t forget, the Bath haulier was served a prison sentence as well.

This is why you see cyclists weaving in and out of traffic, shooting red lights etc. with face masks on to avoid breathing fumes. Pollution is perceived as more dangerous than collision.

The public have been fed so much information, and misinformation, regarding pollution, firms cannot be seen to flout these laws.

19

albion:

Franglais:

albion:

Darkside:

albion:
I’m of the same opinion as yorkshire terrier - it’s nowhere in the same league as hours issues or lack of maintenance. Not saying he should get away with it by any means. I wonder if they are using him as an example to others?

But… he was trying to gain a commercial advantage over his competitors, by deleting (troublesome) emission equipment, while those competitors were shouldering that cost.

Firms that break hours laws or have bad maintenance also get shut down, or have I missed something here?

Sorry but no sympathy here…

Well as Nolans proves, you don’t get shut down for hours offences - though I’d argue that for the breadth and scope of their failings, they should have been.

Whilst their is a commercial advantage to all three, adblue cheating/skimping on maintenance/hours abuses, the latter two have potentially more serious consequences. As I say, I’m not against punishment, just that I think pulling the O license was overly harsh in the circumstances.

We’ll have to agree to disagree :slight_smile:

Only on a coffee break so can’t give a fuller reply, but I think you’re wrong on this one.
Think more if pollution as being like cigarettes. The effects are less immediate than a car crash but are ■■■■■■■■■■ and just as deadly.

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

I knew someone would come up with that, should have know it would be you [emoji38]

Whilst you are right, those emissions are going to only play a small part (if any), in death and disease, unlike brakes failing on a hill in Bath for example. It’s a bit like manslaughter and murder, there are degrees and on my spectrum, this isn’t a big drama.

Ok, we all know the background arguments.
But why accept pollution if it’s avoidable? Sure AdBlue technology costs money, but in this case it’s not someone choosing to run older vehicles, and legally avoiding the need for AdBlue and it’s not someone protesting about the regulations and pushing for change. It’s someone thinking their financial advantage can be gained by risking causing ill health to others. I know you were only a wee kid, but you must remember the blue smoke from all the trucks thirty or more years ago. You wouldn’t accept that from one if your’s today would you? Another thirty years (if we’re around!) we won’t be accepting today’s pollution levels.
Our standards evolve and we need to accept the new regs. If that costs money, then ALL hauliers should play to the same rules, and the rates will reflect that.

Or maybe my first line was wrong? Do you accept the global arguments about pollution caused by infernal combustion engines and deisels in particular?
For myself I can see the problems caused by transport pollution and hate it.
But I still drive for pleasure and am trying to buy an old deisel guzzling 4x4, so any accusation of hypocrisy is well aimed at me.

Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk

20

Fresh off the press:

The Traffic Commissioner for the North West of England, Simon Evans, has granted a stay of his decision to revoke the operator’s licence held by EW & PA Nicholson Ltd.

Mr Evans considered the company’s application on the basis that an appeal has been pursued by the operator to the Upper Tribunal, the body which deals with appeals against Traffic Commissioner decisions. Official notice of the receipt of that appeal has yet to be confirmed to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner (North West of England).

What this means is that the decision by Mr Evans to revoke the company’s licence will now be held to await the outcome of the appeal hearing. The Upper Tribunal is a separate jurisdiction and therefore we cannot comment further on appeal cases.