Muckaway:
I went to start our 8w this morning after it’d been stood since Friday and the red EBS light came on and refused to go out. I did run it up and down the yard at 10-20mph and the light wouldn’t go out so I wrote the fault on the defect note, put VOR on the sheet also and locked the truck up. Not difficult to do is it? I am lucky in that my boss sided with me, in light of the Bath incident.
I wouldn’t take the moral high ground. Was it an amber or red on the crashed truck? You’re an experienced driver, aren’t you around 40? And you’ve said in light of the crash, your boss sided with you, what if it was before the crash, would he of had a different opinion?
A young lad, little exp and been at that firm for 6 days, he’s not going to have your knowledge or confidence.
Muckaway:
I went to start our 8w this morning after it’d been stood since Friday and the red EBS light came on and refused to go out. I did run it up and down the yard at 10-20mph and the light wouldn’t go out so I wrote the fault on the defect note, put VOR on the sheet also and locked the truck up. Not difficult to do is it? I am lucky in that my boss sided with me, in light of the Bath incident.
I wouldn’t take the moral high ground. Was it an amber or red on the crashed truck? You’re an experienced driver, aren’t you around 40? And you’ve said in light of the crash, your boss sided with you, what if it was before the crash, would he of had a different opinion?
A young lad, little exp and been at that firm for 6 days, he’s not going to have your knowledge or confidence.
Amber ABS on the truck involved. Red EBS is a different kettle of fish.
As Carryfast has said it is likely it would get a delayed prohibition at a roadside check.
I don’t hold it against the lad driving it with that on or following his boss down the width restriction. Both the ABS light and the width restriction (the most prominent sign for which had been knocked down by a car and not replaced by the council) feature heavily in the prosecution case but they’re not really terribly relevant to the actual cause.
Edit to add: Despite dcpc there still is a big issue with a lot of drivers not really knowing what constitutes a defect that represents a real threat to road safety and the vehicle should not be driven. It seems to polarise into drivers who take anything out, and don’t care, and drivers who refuse to take anything out for the most trivial reasons like the no smoking sign missing or cruise control broken.
Muckaway:
I went to start our 8w this morning after it’d been stood since Friday and the red EBS light came on and refused to go out. I did run it up and down the yard at 10-20mph and the light wouldn’t go out so I wrote the fault on the defect note, put VOR on the sheet also and locked the truck up. Not difficult to do is it? I am lucky in that my boss sided with me, in light of the Bath incident.
I wouldn’t take the moral high ground. Was it an amber or red on the crashed truck? You’re an experienced driver, aren’t you around 40? And you’ve said in light of the crash, your boss sided with you, what if it was before the crash, would he of had a different opinion?
A young lad, little exp and been at that firm for 6 days, he’s not going to have your knowledge or confidence.
Amber ABS on the truck involved. Red EBS is a different kettle of fish.
As Carryfast has said it is likely it would get a delayed prohibition at a roadside check.
I don’t hold it against the lad driving it with that on or following his boss down the width restriction. Both the ABS light and the width restriction (the most prominent sign for which had been knocked down by a car and not replaced by the council) feature heavily in the prosecution case but they’re not really terribly relevant to the actual cause.
Edit to add: Despite dcpc there still is a big issue with a lot of drivers not really knowing what constitutes a defect that represents a real threat to road safety and the vehicle should not be driven. It seems to polarise into drivers who take anything out, and don’t care, and drivers who refuse to take anything out for the most trivial reasons like the no smoking sign missing or cruise control broken.
Muckaway:
I went to start our 8w this morning after it’d been stood since Friday and the red EBS light came on and refused to go out. I did run it up and down the yard at 10-20mph and the light wouldn’t go out so I wrote the fault on the defect note, put VOR on the sheet also and locked the truck up. Not difficult to do is it? I am lucky in that my boss sided with me, in light of the Bath incident.
I wouldn’t take the moral high ground. Was it an amber or red on the crashed truck? You’re an experienced driver, aren’t you around 40? And you’ve said in light of the crash, your boss sided with you, what if it was before the crash, would he of had a different opinion?
A young lad, little exp and been at that firm for 6 days, he’s not going to have your knowledge or confidence.
Amber ABS on the truck involved. Red EBS is a different kettle of fish.
As Carryfast has said it is likely it would get a delayed prohibition at a roadside check.
I don’t hold it against the lad driving it with that on or following his boss down the width restriction. Both the ABS light and the width restriction (the most prominent sign for which had been knocked down by a car and not replaced by the council) feature heavily in the prosecution case but they’re not really terribly relevant to the actual cause.
Edit to add: Despite dcpc there still is a big issue with a lot of drivers not really knowing what constitutes a defect that represents a real threat to road safety and the vehicle should not be driven. It seems to polarise into drivers who take anything out, and don’t care, and drivers who refuse to take anything out for the most trivial reasons like the no smoking sign missing or cruise control broken.
Oversimplifying it ABS is anti lock braking only. EBS is electrically triggered braking.
When the driver presses the the brake pedal the EBS vehicle starts braking instantly. Without EBS it takes about half a second for the air signal from the pedal to produce pressure at the wheel end of the sytem. At 56 mph that is a difference of 41 feet travelled with nothing happening.
20 year old driver! Couldn’t have been the best way for him to gain experience /waste has to be one of the most dangerous sectors in the industry. R.I.P to those sadly killed.
Own Account Driver:
I don’t hold it against the lad driving it with that on or following his boss down the width restriction. Both the ABS light and the width restriction (the most prominent sign for which had been knocked down by a car and not replaced by the council) feature heavily in the prosecution case but they’re not really terribly relevant to the actual cause.
I’m surprised that his defence hasn’t moved for him to be discharged.On the grounds that the prosecution hasn’t proven beyond reasonable doubt,that the alleged defects,which allegedly resulted in the truck running away ( also seemingly admitted by the operator ),were obvious to him during his checks at the start of the journey.Nor that the ABS warning or 6’6’’ restriction are relevant.
SouthEastCashew:
20 year old driver! Couldn’t have been the best way for him to gain experience /waste has to be one of the most dangerous sectors in the industry. R.I.P to those sadly killed.
Yes but he was experienced in operating farm machinery, just as I was experienced in quarry plant at 20. Surely you don’t need experience to recognise a warning light? Isn’t the initial DCPC for new drivers supposed to cover warning lights with pre start checks?
Stevie, my boss wasn’t sure regarding EBS warning (it was yellow originally which went red once the engine was idling). We both thought it was a probibition so VOR’d in light of the Bath crash to be safe. And yes when I was a newbie I had enough common sense to report things. I’d reported non effective exhaust brakes, and duff rev counter within a few days of going on the road. I soon learned these were standard on ■■■■■■■ powered Fodens.
Muckaway:
And yes when I was a newbie I had enough common sense to report things. I’d reported non effective exhaust brakes, and duff rev counter within a few days of going on the road. I soon learned these were standard on ■■■■■■■ powered Fodens.
What if the guvnor then says that neither are a DVSA prohibition issue take it out or else.The fact is if the DVSA want to make an ABS warning a VOR issue then give drivers the leverage to say no in the form of making it one.As opposed to grovelling to the FTA by relaxing that to continue a journey.
The judge (quite rightly in my opinion) seemed far from impressed with the prosecution case and seems to be nudging the jury towards acquittals all round. I can imagine a sarcastic eyebrow was raised when he talked about the initial miscalculation of the brake efficiency by the experts.
The judge told the jury it might be helpful, in terms of reaching a manslaughter verdict, to consider “what you accept as to the condition of the vehicle on the 17th of January and the 31st of January” - the dates of Wood’s last safety inspection and Gordon’s last interim check of L8 CMT.
He said the prosecution and the defence relied on the same assumption that: "If the defects had been there, they would have been staring Peter Wood in the face, and for that matter Matthew Gordon.
“The critical question may be: Were they there to be seen?”
The judge reminded the jury that the defence had told them that “the expertise here” is not a precise science, in terms, for example, of the ageing of the brake defects.
He reminded them that the overall efficiency of the brakes at the time of the crash was calculated at 28 per cent after an initial miscalculation.
He reminded them that there was some evidence that the axle two driver’s side slack adjustor had been replaced, in contrast to expert opinion that a defect on that brake was long-standing. He also mentioned that there was some uncertainty around the ageing of a brake weld.
Regarding the charges of causing death by careless/dangerous driving and of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, the judge said: “You might want to ask yourself, realisticaly, did it [Potter’s driving] make any real contribution to the accident that occurred. Unless you can answer that question ‘yes’, you will be bound to aquit Mr Potter and Mr Gordon.”
The judge sent the jury out with the final advice that: “You must reach, if you can, a unanimous verdict.”
Somebody’s clearly at fault. A lorry can’t stop going down a hill, it’s either the drivers’ fault or the operator. Brakes don’t just stop working in this day and age. I wonder if a retrial could be on the cards? After four deaths I can’t see how the case will just get thrown out, somebody will be held responsible.
Muckaway:
Somebody’s clearly at fault. A lorry can’t stop going down a hill, it’s either the drivers’ fault or the operator. Brakes don’t just stop working in this day and age. I wonder if a retrial could be on the cards? After four deaths I can’t see how the case will just get thrown out, somebody will be held responsible.
Based on all the evidence, I’ve seen, liabilty really rests with the decision that’s allowed an inexperienced teenage boy (the demographic all statistics show are the highest risk of road accidents) behind the wheel of one of the largest, and heaviest vehicles on the road.
It also lies with the architects of the training regime which, despite some improvement with loaded vehicles etc., is still flawed and is woefully inadequate in preparing new drivers for real world driving work.
Prior to the driver shortage panic the age was 21 and it should go back to that.
Muckaway:
Somebody’s clearly at fault. After four deaths I can’t see how the case will just get thrown out, somebody will be held responsible.
No Criminal Prosecution after The Glasgow Bin Lorry incident , which caused 6 deaths .
Yes but that’s Glasgow. A place where criminal activity is more certain than a sunrise.
I still think the driver should bear some responsibility, he was driving and he let it run away.
I can see any manslaughter conviction going to appeal on the grounds of irrelevant evidence being presented, but which was sufficient to influence the jury’s decision.
Muckaway:
Somebody’s clearly at fault. A lorry can’t stop going down a hill, it’s either the drivers’ fault or the operator. Brakes don’t just stop working in this day and age. I wonder if a retrial could be on the cards? After four deaths I can’t see how the case will just get thrown out, somebody will be held responsible.
Based on all the evidence, I’ve seen, liabilty really rests with the decision that’s allowed an inexperienced teenage boy (the demographic all statistics show are the highest risk of road accidents) behind the wheel of one of the largest, and heaviest vehicles on the road.
It also lies with the architects of the training regime which, despite some improvement with loaded vehicles etc., is still flawed and is woefully inadequate in preparing new drivers for real world driving work.
Prior to the driver shortage panic the age was 21 and it should go back to that.
Blimey not this again.If you raise the age to 21 or even 31 he’ll still be as inexperienced on his first day behind the wheel of an 18 tonner ( bearing in mind that braking capacity has nothing to do with gross weights in that a four axle 32 tonner actually has more braking capacity than a two axle 18 tonner ) as he will be at 19.
As for this case it’s looking more like the establishment knows that its own training regime of brakes to slow gears to go is probably the real cause of the crash and that everything else is a diversion from that.
Own Account Driver:
Prior to the driver shortage panic the age was 21 and it should go back to that.
+1
Its been 18 for at least 10 years
The young driver training scheme was actually brought in during the mid 1970’s.I know that because I asked the school ‘careers advisors’ for help in getting a placement on it when I left school.To which their answer was we know nothing about it we might be able offer you help with getting a job as a trainee gas fitter.
Muckaway:
Somebody’s clearly at fault. After four deaths I can’t see how the case will just get thrown out, somebody will be held responsible.
No Criminal Prosecution after The Glasgow Bin Lorry incident , which caused 6 deaths .
Yes but that’s Glasgow. A place where criminal activity is more certain than a sunrise.
I still think the driver should bear some responsibility, he was driving and he let it run away.
Certainly none of the accused are beyond criticism but the prosecution didn’t seem, to me, to satisfactorily prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. We will have to see what the jury think.
I’m certainly troubled most with the operator, and why he deliberately, in my view, hid his identity, as the operator, from the police in the immediate aftermath of the crash. It could be fairly innocent, although still indicative of dishonesty, in he was trying to hide the fact he knew about the ABS light but the concern is he knew more.
Unfortunately the VOSA investigation and prosecution expert witnesses were such a muppet show we’ll probably never know.
