Do the training, but don’t produce the card = £30 fixed penalty
Don’t do the training and drive a truck (unless within one of the stated exemptions) = visit to magistrates court and fine of up to £1000 for the driver
Visit to magistrates court and fine of up to £1000 for the driver’s employer.
Both the driver and employer (if the employer has an o licence) are than obliged to inform the traffic commissioner.
The TCs have said that they will suspend the driver’s vocational licence (ie PCV and LGV) until the training is done and the DCPC is obtained.
The operator will have his O licence suspended until he can provide evidence that all his drivers hold DCPC cards.
The reality is that this will force many offenders out of business.
Those employers who don’t hold O licences will just face the fine, so the consequences for them are less serious.
So you’re admitting little or no consequences for anyone there’s a strong argument the exemptions apply to.
Depends whether or not you think a court appearance, a conviction and a fine are of little or no consequence…I suppose some people are used to it and regard paying fines as a tax on getting caught. For the driver, the consequences, including suspension of his PCV?LGV entitlement are the same whether he works for an o licence holder or not.
GasGas:
As the employer, the workshop would be done for ‘causing or permitting the offence’. If you knew as much about the law as you think you do,then you would know that. I think we can take the rest of your opinion with a healthy pinch of sodium chloride, but thanks for your contribution!
What law are you saying the workshop would be breaking and of what significance would the ramifications be to them?
It’s the same as when an employer allows any other illegal driving…like no licence, defective tyres etc. The driver is prosecuted, and so is his employer, which can be either a person or a company, for ‘causing or permitting’ the offence. The employer is liable to exactly the same penalties as the driver. Many employers don’t realise this until the summons drops through the letter box.It’s pretty much the same as ‘aiding and abetting’ in criminal law.
I once had dealings with a sole trader operator of tipper trucks, who was horrified that he got penalty points on his licence when an employee was caught driving a truck with defective tyres…rather a lot of defective tyres.
“they can’t do this to me,” he said.
“they just have,” I replied.
I think some folk still haven’t realised, unless you have a driver CPC you will be breaking the law when you drive a truck or bus…unless you specifically fall into one of the exemptions.
That you have a poor opinion of the training on offer won’t be much of a defence in court.
I have no ulterior motive for saying this, because I’m not involved in DCPC training. There’s just a tide of misinformation originating from people who don’t think that it applies to them, or that the law won’t be applied at all, and this risks misleading other people. The DCPC thing has been going on for the best part of five years, and it is going to happen. I’d strongly advise anyone who hasn’t started training to do so now, or actively seek another career.
I’m not sure why you’re going off at this tangent instead of answering the question. Not having a licence and bald tyres are a different thing altogether to DCPC and I’m not sure who’s said the poor quality of the training could be used as a legal argument.
No-one’s said professional drivers won’t be required to have DCPC and it isn’t sensible to get it clearly none of the exemptions apply to them. Those that are intending to continue without doing DCPC because they’re gambling it will eventually be abandoned or the odds of being caught and fined are low is their own personal choice.
Not a tangent, just an example of how ‘causing and permitting’ works in law. In fact the DCPC can be seen as an annex to a driving licence, being issued and governed by the DVLA and DSA.
Let an employee drive without doing DCPC training and you can get fined up to £1000 if you can’t prove that an exemption applies. this is explicitly outlined in the legislation. I suggest you research and read this carefully.
Other, and more potentially disastrous, consequences for hauliers in particular are outlined above.
I hope this helps.
I have not been discussing professional drivers/hauliers my posts have purely been relating to the exemptions. It would be for prosecutors to prove an exemption didn’t apply that is how the legal system still works in this country.
Do the training, but don’t produce the card = £30 fixed penalty
Don’t do the training and drive a truck (unless within one of the stated exemptions) = visit to magistrates court and fine of up to £1000 for the driver
Visit to magistrates court and fine of up to £1000 for the driver’s employer.
Both the driver and employer (if the employer has an o licence) are than obliged to inform the traffic commissioner.
The TCs have said that they will suspend the driver’s vocational licence (ie PCV and LGV) until the training is done and the DCPC is obtained.
The operator will have his O licence suspended until he can provide evidence that all his drivers hold DCPC cards.
The reality is that this will force many offenders out of business.
Those employers who don’t hold O licences will just face the fine, so the consequences for them are less serious.
So you’re admitting little or no consequences for anyone there’s a strong argument the exemptions apply to.
Depends whether or not you think a court appearance, a conviction and a fine are of little or no consequence…I suppose some people are used to it and regard paying fines as a tax on getting caught. For the driver, the consequences, including suspension of his PCV?LGV entitlement are the same whether he works for an o licence holder or not.
Companies are fictional legal entities they don’t lose sleep over court appearances or care what the neighbours think. In most cases where exemptions are genuinely likely to apply, the consequence to the driver of losing the entitlement until the training is completed are unlikely to be significant.
GasGas:
As the employer, the workshop would be done for ‘causing or permitting the offence’. If you knew as much about the law as you think you do,then you would know that. I think we can take the rest of your opinion with a healthy pinch of sodium chloride, but thanks for your contribution!
What law are you saying the workshop would be breaking and of what significance would the ramifications be to them?
It’s the same as when an employer allows any other illegal driving…like no licence, defective tyres etc. The driver is prosecuted, and so is his employer, which can be either a person or a company, for ‘causing or permitting’ the offence. The employer is liable to exactly the same penalties as the driver. Many employers don’t realise this until the summons drops through the letter box.It’s pretty much the same as ‘aiding and abetting’ in criminal law.
I once had dealings with a sole trader operator of tipper trucks, who was horrified that he got penalty points on his licence when an employee was caught driving a truck with defective tyres…rather a lot of defective tyres.
“they can’t do this to me,” he said.
“they just have,” I replied.
I think some folk still haven’t realised, unless you have a driver CPC you will be breaking the law when you drive a truck or bus…unless you specifically fall into one of the exemptions.
That you have a poor opinion of the training on offer won’t be much of a defence in court.
I have no ulterior motive for saying this, because I’m not involved in DCPC training. There’s just a tide of misinformation originating from people who don’t think that it applies to them, or that the law won’t be applied at all, and this risks misleading other people. The DCPC thing has been going on for the best part of five years, and it is going to happen. I’d strongly advise anyone who hasn’t started training to do so now, or actively seek another career.
I’m not sure why you’re going off at this tangent instead of answering the question. Not having a licence and bald tyres are a different thing altogether to DCPC and I’m not sure who’s said the poor quality of the training could be used as a legal argument.
No-one’s said professional drivers won’t be required to have DCPC and it isn’t sensible to get it clearly none of the exemptions apply to them. Those that are intending to continue without doing DCPC because they’re gambling it will eventually be abandoned or the odds of being caught and fined are low is their own personal choice.
Not a tangent, just an example of how ‘causing and permitting’ works in law. In fact the DCPC can be seen as an annex to a driving licence, being issued and governed by the DVLA and DSA.
Let an employee drive without doing DCPC training and you can get fined up to £1000 if you can’t prove that an exemption applies. this is explicitly outlined in the legislation. I suggest you research and read this carefully.
Other, and more potentially disastrous, consequences for hauliers in particular are outlined above.
I hope this helps.
I have not been discussing professional drivers/hauliers my posts have purely been relating to the exemptions. It would be for prosecutors to prove an exemption didn’t apply that is how the legal system still works in this country.
Is wrong, I’m afraid. It’s a driving licence issue, and the obligation is on the defendant to prove the exemption applies. This is a case where you have to prove innocence (because you are seeking to take advantage of an exemption) rather than the prosecution having to prove guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
As I say, you really need to research this carefully yourself rather than asking questions here.
GasGas:
As the employer, the workshop would be done for ‘causing or permitting the offence’. If you knew as much about the law as you think you do,then you would know that. I think we can take the rest of your opinion with a healthy pinch of sodium chloride, but thanks for your contribution!
What law are you saying the workshop would be breaking and of what significance would the ramifications be to them?
It’s the same as when an employer allows any other illegal driving…like no licence, defective tyres etc. The driver is prosecuted, and so is his employer, which can be either a person or a company, for ‘causing or permitting’ the offence. The employer is liable to exactly the same penalties as the driver. Many employers don’t realise this until the summons drops through the letter box.It’s pretty much the same as ‘aiding and abetting’ in criminal law.
I once had dealings with a sole trader operator of tipper trucks, who was horrified that he got penalty points on his licence when an employee was caught driving a truck with defective tyres…rather a lot of defective tyres.
“they can’t do this to me,” he said.
“they just have,” I replied.
I think some folk still haven’t realised, unless you have a driver CPC you will be breaking the law when you drive a truck or bus…unless you specifically fall into one of the exemptions.
That you have a poor opinion of the training on offer won’t be much of a defence in court.
I have no ulterior motive for saying this, because I’m not involved in DCPC training. There’s just a tide of misinformation originating from people who don’t think that it applies to them, or that the law won’t be applied at all, and this risks misleading other people. The DCPC thing has been going on for the best part of five years, and it is going to happen. I’d strongly advise anyone who hasn’t started training to do so now, or actively seek another career.
I’m not sure why you’re going off at this tangent instead of answering the question. Not having a licence and bald tyres are a different thing altogether to DCPC and I’m not sure who’s said the poor quality of the training could be used as a legal argument.
No-one’s said professional drivers won’t be required to have DCPC and it isn’t sensible to get it clearly none of the exemptions apply to them. Those that are intending to continue without doing DCPC because they’re gambling it will eventually be abandoned or the odds of being caught and fined are low is their own personal choice.
Not a tangent, just an example of how ‘causing and permitting’ works in law. In fact the DCPC can be seen as an annex to a driving licence, being issued and governed by the DVLA and DSA.
Let an employee drive without doing DCPC training and you can get fined up to £1000 if you can’t prove that an exemption applies. this is explicitly outlined in the legislation. I suggest you research and read this carefully.
Other, and more potentially disastrous, consequences for hauliers in particular are outlined above.
I hope this helps.
I have not been discussing professional drivers/hauliers my posts have purely been relating to the exemptions. It would be for prosecutors to prove an exemption didn’t apply that is how the legal system still works in this country.
Is wrong, I’m afraid. It’s a driving licence issue, and the obligation is on the defendant to prove the exemption applies. This is a case where you have to prove innocence (because you are seeking to take advantage of an exemption) rather than the prosecution having to prove guilt ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
As I say, you really need to research this carefully yourself rather than asking questions here.
Not at a magistrate level only at a higher track or on appeal.
You’re also misrepresenting exemption as some sort of ducking out of responsibilities you are simply either exempt or you are not.
Because until it’s case law, VOSA can appeal against the acquittal and take it to a higher court (which they are very likely to do, and have done with tacho cases etc)
The way VOSA work they have almost limitless resources to take a case as far as they need to to secure a conviction and the necessary case law.
As you work your way up the system it becomes increasingly more expensive to defend yourself: you are talking £100,000 for the Supreme Court just to get through the door. And legal aid is now difficult or impossible to come by.
I’m not for a moment saying it’s just…but it is ‘British Justice’, and cases are usually won by the side with the most money in Britain.
To quote Liberace: “I just love British justice…it really is the best money can buy!”
He said that after winning a libel case against the Daily Mirror, which had insinuated that he was gay back in the days when people worried about that kind of thing. He later died of AIDs, but the Mirror never got their money back.
GasGas:
As the employer, the workshop would be done for ‘causing or permitting the offence’. If you knew as much about the law as you think you do,then you would know that. I think we can take the rest of your opinion with a healthy pinch of sodium chloride, but thanks for your contribution!
What law are you saying the workshop would be breaking and of what significance would the ramifications be to them?
Any employer who allows a driver to drive when they do not have the correct legal dcpc requirements is open to a fine of up to £1000
That is written in law
Eariler in the thread you said this:
£30 FPN for not carrying a DQC but up to £1000 for driver and operator if not done the required training
Both statements I made are correct as they refer to diferent issues