Boyles directors face a £1.6 m penalty

[markwill]

limeyphil:

Greg:

limeyphil:

91 per cen of journeys involving Boyle Transport trucks and drivers had some form of manipulation or falsification hiding the true driving and hours worked.

The maximum driving in a fortnight is 90 hours. Therefore in order for 91% of journeys to have had some sort of manipulation, They would have had to have driven for around 1000 hours per fornight.
(1000 hours) - (91%) = 90 hours driving.
So when i see quotes like 91% of journeys have been manipulated, I can’t help thinking it’s a load of crap.
What i do find astonishing is how gullible people are.

Really■■? Or could the"journey" simply be a round trip somewhere whereby during the course of that trip an infringement had occurred. So for simple arguments sake out of 500 round trips 455 showed an infringement had occurred during that trip which makes it 91%. Which is much more achievable and believe able.

I don’t know. It’s the way i read it. I suppose the 91% thing could be interpreted in a few ways. My interpretation is just one of them.
But whatever way it is, The sentencing is way out of order for a bit of bent running.

how were the drivers paid, was it per mile

[limeyphil]

markwill:

limeyphil:

Greg:

limeyphil:

91 per cen of journeys involving Boyle Transport trucks and drivers had some form of manipulation or falsification hiding the true driving and hours worked.

The maximum driving in a fortnight is 90 hours. Therefore in order for 91% of journeys to have had some sort of manipulation, They would have had to have driven for around 1000 hours per fornight.
(1000 hours) - (91%) = 90 hours driving.
So when i see quotes like 91% of journeys have been manipulated, I can’t help thinking it’s a load of crap.
What i do find astonishing is how gullible people are.

Really■■? Or could the"journey" simply be a round trip somewhere whereby during the course of that trip an infringement had occurred. So for simple arguments sake out of 500 round trips 455 showed an infringement had occurred during that trip which makes it 91%. Which is much more achievable and believe able.

I don’t know. It’s the way i read it. I suppose the 91% thing could be interpreted in a few ways. My interpretation is just one of them.
But whatever way it is, The sentencing is way out of order for a bit of bent running.

how were the drivers paid, was it per mile

No. It was per trip. Glasgow to Milan and back £500. Most did 2 a week.

[winseer]

limeyphil:

91 per cen of journeys involving Boyle Transport trucks and drivers had some form of manipulation or falsification hiding the true driving and hours worked.

The maximum driving in a fortnight is 90 hours. Therefore in order for 91% of journeys to have had some sort of manipulation, They would have had to have driven for around 1000 hours per fornight.
(1000 hours) - (91%) = 90 hours driving.
So when i see quotes like 91% of journeys have been manipulated, I can’t help thinking it’s a load of crap.
What i do find astonishing is how gullible people are.

And Conor, I don’t work for English firms for a reason. They are full of jobsworth yes men that spoil the job by working for peanuts. I will choose who i work for, and where i work.

Eh?

If you drive one day a week like I sometimes do, and that day has you on shift 22 hours, then you are running bent. Never breached the 90 hour fortnight though did it?

91% of journeys is about all aspects of running bent in combination I would think. Sometimes over shift, Sometimes over driving hours, sometimes starting a new shift less than 9 hours after the last one, taking tacho out for hours at a time, vehicle not roadworthy, paperwork for goods on board dodgy, insurance scams, pretending to be someone else, driving while disqualified, and even driving whilst off duty… I’m sure some could add even more to this list with some deeper thought.

As for the argument that “Firms can’t run bent without driver assistance” - Well, looking at how lickcock some people are for a full time job these days, I could believe that a boss could just say:-

“Job for you if you get on with it without question, and back me, the boss, up. Job not for you if you’re a boat-rocker like Winseer”

Are you going to run bent therefore, or are you going to follow Winseer back to the jobcentre?

Boss Bullying=Being forced to run bent to keep the job. Either that, or there’s more lickcocks north of Watford gap than I thought.

[markwill]

limeyphil:

markwill:

limeyphil:

Greg:

limeyphil:

91 per cen of journeys involving Boyle Transport trucks and drivers had some form of manipulation or falsification hiding the true driving and hours worked.

The maximum driving in a fortnight is 90 hours. Therefore in order for 91% of journeys to have had some sort of manipulation, They would have had to have driven for around 1000 hours per fornight.
(1000 hours) - (91%) = 90 hours driving.
So when i see quotes like 91% of journeys have been manipulated, I can’t help thinking it’s a load of crap.
What i do find astonishing is how gullible people are.

Really■■? Or could the"journey" simply be a round trip somewhere whereby during the course of that trip an infringement had occurred. So for simple arguments sake out of 500 round trips 455 showed an infringement had occurred during that trip which makes it 91%. Which is much more achievable and believe able.

I don’t know. It’s the way i read it. I suppose the 91% thing could be interpreted in a few ways. My interpretation is just one of them.
But whatever way it is, The sentencing is way out of order for a bit of bent running.

how were the drivers paid, was it per mile

No. It was per trip. Glasgow to Milan and back £500. Most did 2 a week.

think its a case of the works there if you want it,both operator and drivers benefitted from it, im sure if the firm forced drivers to run bent it would have only took a disgruntled driver to blow the whistle

[winseer]

^^^^ … and I reckon that’s exactly what brought it to the attention of the authorities in the first place. A single disgruntled driver.

[milkchurns]

thats a £1000 a week trip money. 6 case of volka, at least 30 case of wine, and the 4 boxes of ■■■■. when do i start■■?

limeyphil:

markwill:

limeyphil:

Greg:

limeyphil:

91 per cen of journeys involving Boyle Transport trucks and drivers had some form of manipulation or falsification hiding the true driving and hours worked.

The maximum driving in a fortnight is 90 hours. Therefore in order for 91% of journeys to have had some sort of manipulation, They would have had to have driven for around 1000 hours per fornight.
(1000 hours) - (91%) = 90 hours driving.
So when i see quotes like 91% of journeys have been manipulated, I can’t help thinking it’s a load of crap.
What i do find astonishing is how gullible people are.

Really■■? Or could the"journey" simply be a round trip somewhere whereby during the course of that trip an infringement had occurred. So for simple arguments sake out of 500 round trips 455 showed an infringement had occurred during that trip which makes it 91%. Which is much more achievable and believe able.

I don’t know. It’s the way i read it. I suppose the 91% thing could be interpreted in a few ways. My interpretation is just one of them.
But whatever way it is, The sentencing is way out of order for a bit of bent running.

how were the drivers paid, was it per mile

No. It was per trip. Glasgow to Milan and back £500. Most did 2 a week.

[winseer]

[
Really■■? Or could the"journey" simply be a round trip somewhere whereby during the course of that trip an infringement had occurred. So for simple arguments sake out of 500 round trips 455 showed an infringement had occurred during that trip which makes it 91%. Which is much more achievable and believe able.
[/quote]
I don’t know. It’s the way i read it. I suppose the 91% thing could be interpreted in a few ways. My interpretation is just one of them.
But whatever way it is, The sentencing is way out of order for a bit of bent running.
[/quote]
how were the drivers paid, was it per mile
[/quote]
No. It was per trip. Glasgow to Milan and back £500. Most did 2 a week.
[/quote]

[/quote]

If you do a long trip, then you’re statistically more likely to have an infringement at some point than a short trip it’s true.

However, to collate the data of 500 LONG runs as opposed to pulling Boyles wagons into laybys near a yard on a regular basis over a few weeks is going to collate that data a lot quicker isn’t it?
Since Digicards hold 28 days of data on a rolling over basis, VOSA might find that you are “clean today”, but can also see that this particular driver pulled a 22 hour shift with 16 hours actual driving last Saturday, which makes him duly added to the 91% list of “seriously bent practices” that surely this entire court case has been about?

Now… You check another 499 drivers in this example, and lo and behold, 454 of them have got something seriously dodgy on each of their digicards alone.
This is before the office gear is checked, and the firm itself raided.

I wonder how many drivers tried to duck and dive with arguments like:-
“Nah mate, I didn’t do a 22 hour shift. I did 10.5, but I forgot to take the card out you see, and this agency bod who went home to Siberia the next day after bringing the truck back ran another 11.5 hours on my card that last day before realising he’d made a mistake.”

I bet arguments like that had Vosa officials straining to keep straight faces…

Then comes the office audit…
“So, what’s the address and other particulars of this ‘Boris Ignorantski’ who drove Fred Blogg’s tractor on his card?
Your options are: Confess to employing an illegal immigrant, or hand over his full details right now…
PO: Ok Mr Boils, you’ve chosen to play the “dunno what you’re talking about” card.
PO: Suspicion of employing an illegal alien.
VO: Falsification of Tacho records, office records, tax records, aiding and abetting benefits fraud, shed for bed used by this guy not fit for human habitation, refusal to cooperate with authorities, employing drivers with no digicard etc etc.”

TM: “No, it’s all Fred’s fault. He’s lying about not doing that 22 hour shift you see. He’ll now of course take the can for all this, and we’ll forget about Boris, who’s just a figment of everyone’s imagination…”

VO: "FFS Constable in attendance - We’re going to need a bigger van to wind up this den of iniquity!"

Right on Commander. The authorities have got this one right…