dieseldog999:
anyone know the max penalty for getting stopped without the herbert cpc completed? it might be relevant to about 99% of the drivers like myself who dont give a toss?..most i know are much of the same opinion as myself,dont know,dont care etc…would be interesting to know the intended penalties just for the sake of it…■■
There are penalties for the operator of the vehicle, which include points on your OCRS, that means more targeting and basically pinging VOSA’s radar.
Because of this I don’t know how many operators will be willing to use driver without a DQC after September. We operate trucks, although not in general haulage, and use part time drivers, after September we won’t hire any drivers without a DCPC, despite a possible exemption for our type of work as I can’t get a definitive answer, so have told my boss its to risky for us to apply the exemption until its gets clarified.
dieseldog999:
anyone know the max penalty for getting stopped without the herbert cpc completed? it might be relevant to about 99% of the drivers like myself who dont give a toss?..most i know are much of the same opinion as myself,dont know,dont care etc…would be interesting to know the intended penalties just for the sake of it…■■
There are penalties for the operator of the vehicle, which include points on your OCRS, that means more targeting and basically pinging VOSA’s radar.
Because of this I don’t know how many operators will be willing to use driver without a DQC after September. We operate trucks, although not in general haulage, and use part time drivers, after September we won’t hire any drivers without a DCPC, despite a possible exemption for our type of work as I can’t get a definitive answer, so have told my boss its to risky for us to apply the exemption until its gets clarified.
The legality of this is untested though really. The clear intent of the original legislation is that sole responsibility for ensuring the training has been received lies with the driver and there is no mention of operators having any responsibilities in enforcing it. The authorities in this country, whose modus operandi for ensuring compliance by the deadline, has been, in willing collusion with the trade press, a campaign of constant bullying threats towards any party they think might feel worried by it. This all hinges on their untested assertion it’s a repute issue.
On the insurance issue. Despite persistent attempts, by the various DCPC vested interests to drag the spectre of driving uninsured into the picture, so far the insurance business has remained pretty much uninterested in providing any indication whatsoever that this would be the case and the best they have got out of them when pushed is it could have some ramifications for premiums.
Whilst getting a dcpc might be the responsibility of the driver, so is getting a driving licence for the vehicle they are planning to drive. But the operator (or any employer, not just haulage) still has a responsibility to ensure the driver has a valid licence before letting somebody drive their vehicles.
The same alread goes for allowing drivers to drive without a valid DQC, VOSA have already said they add 25 points to the operators OCRS just for a driver being given a fixed penalty for not having a DQC and more if the operator also gets prosecuted and they have already started checking for DQC where appropriate and have issued fines and prosecutions.
Of course VOSA are only interpreting the legislation, but I doubt my boss has the time, will or money to take VOSA to court. So for us it will be better to play safe.
I’m sure any insurance company will be happy to take your money, but they’ll also be very quick to use the lack of a DCPC to avoid paying out on a claim.
It’s down to the operator to carry out licence validity checks on all new drivers and periodically on all existing drivers (usually insurance company led). So effectively, the DQC will (or already is a requirement for new recruits who passed car test after 1997) become part of the licence checking procedure. After September 2014 absence of a DQC for in-scope drivers simply means their licence to drive that particular vehicle is temporarily invalid, similar to a driver not renewing his medical. This, of course, should be picked up by the operator’s driving licence checking procedure. Would you let an employee drive your LGV without an LGV licence? This is what a lack of DQC boils down to.
thanks for the info guys…sounds good news…yet another can of worms judicial legislation bollox.all the cowboys will batter on regardless,and worry about the fine once stopped. i suppose plod ,vosa,and the judge will have their own seperate completely different views from the defending lawyer,the driver and the subbie boss who will be lying through their teeth anyway.the insurance side of things looks like an easy enough deal,so looks like most of ireland north and south (definately the south)will just keep the spurs on and plough on regardless apart from the big companies and the agencies.can you imaging the queue of court appearances within 3 months of d day?..watch this space for news of my 1st fine methinks…
Driving unqualified could get your firm’s insurance cancelled…which could put them out of business and you out of a job
Well another insurer is highly unlikely to turn their noses up at a four figure premium if they were stupid enough to.
But can the average haulage enterprise afford to write off one four figure sum when their existing policy is cancelled, than have to pay an even higher premium to renew, because having had a policy terminated means that you are flagged up as ‘high risk’ whoever you are insured with?
Cost plus lost earnings could mean £200 per module for a driver to pay. You think that is acceptable for a worthless course but paying the same money but not attending is worse? The brown envelope route works for me as long as its a rest day so it is a choice of spending my day off at home or with someone waffling at me which will only annoy me. That will inevitably lead to the trainer getting annoyed too. The entire concept is a scam so leave us to get conned in a way that works
scanny77:
‘…The entire concept is a scam so leave us to get conned in a way that works…’
Or to otherwise put it:
‘The EU has got such a strangle-hold over the UK that despite a huge number of citizens being pee’d off wondering about it’s distant uselessness, they usually oppose it’s undemocratic stranglehold with a passing whinge - yet continue to vote for the Lib/lab/Con who all advocate for more of the same disenfranchising clap-trap from Brussels’.
