I was hoping that geebee45 would make a comment as to how VOSA would view this issue and what they would expect the driver to show on the records…
It is the first day of work after taking a weekly rest.
Driver over runs by 3 hours due to an unavoidable incident
The driver has now done 18 hours from that start of the shift
The minimum rest that the driver can take is
Firstly, thanks to Rog for telling me about this thread. Secondly, apologies for the delay in adding to the debate had a weekend off to go to Burghley with all the horsey people. 
The Guidance Note is published by the European Commission and is their view on how the legislation is to be interpreted. I think there are about 7 of them at present. This particular one relates to what happens when your break or rest period is necessarily delayed due to ‘unforeseen’ circumstances. In this instance you must still have a daily rest period; 11 hours which may be reduced to 9 if the option is available. In the terms of the original question if you started duty at 06:00 Monday and were delayed, resulting in you not finishing duty until 22:00 then the earliest you could start duty would be 07:00 Tuesday (9:00 hrs) or 09:00 Tuesday (11:00 hrs). The fact that the delay has ‘moved’ your rest or break doesn’t give you carte blanche to carry on regardless.
Couple of points to remember; the circumstance must be something immediate rather than historical. You cannot use an Article 12 defence for going over your hours at 18:00 (for example) for an incident that occurred at 12:00.
Remember to write the reasons as to why you departed from the Regulation as soon as you get to the parking place. The only place for the record is on the reverse of a printout or the back of the days’ chart.
ROG:
I was hoping that geebee45 would make a comment as to how VOSA would view this issue and what they would expect the driver to show on the records…It is the first day of work after taking a weekly rest.
Driver over runs by 3 hours due to an unavoidable incident
The driver has now done 18 hours from that start of the shift
The minimum rest that the driver can take is
Answer = 9 hours - thank you geebee45
geebee45:
The Guidance Note is published by the European Commission and is their view on how the legislation is to be interpreted. I think there are about 7 of them at present. This particular one relates to what happens when your break or rest period is necessarily delayed due to ‘unforeseen’ circumstances. In this instance you must still have a daily rest period; 11 hours which may be reduced to 9 if the option is available. In the terms of the original question if you started duty at 06:00 Monday and were delayed, resulting in you not finishing duty until 22:00 then the earliest you could start duty would be 07:00 Tuesday (9:00 hrs) or 09:00 Tuesday (11:00 hrs). The fact that the delay has ‘moved’ your rest or break doesn’t give you carte blanche to carry on regardless.
Thanks for that geebee. Last time I went to Burghley, they were all found guilty so I don’t go any more.
And please bear in mind before I go any further that I call the thread “Nitpicking” and that it’s really just a discussion point.
I think the last line of the of Guidance Note 1 forms a contradiction where it says that the deviation must not lead to a reduction of the required breaks/rest as well as in the sub para above stating that driving limits should be respected…
The lack of “carte blanche” (as I said earlier) is, in my mind, covered by the “to such extent necessary” bit of Article 12.
The “time gain” argument, although valid, is at best “debatable” If I plan to get to say, Alconbury, have my daily rest, then start the following day in time to reach a delivery point that is 3 hours away, booked in at 9am. If I were to an Article 12 departure making the finish time of the previous day 9.30pm then start the second day at 6am in order to be on time at the deliver, I would argue that I haven’t made a “time gain “ — rather “reclaimed the lost time. Dubious, I know — but arguable nonetheless.
Now then — To the real nitty gritty of the wordings of the Rules (and laughingly to their claimed “aims and purpose” ) . . . . . . . .
Paragraph 17:
This Regulation aims to improve social conditions for employees who are covered by it, as well as to improve general road safety. It does so mainly by means of the provisions pertaining to maximum driving times per day, per week and per period of two consecutive weeks, the provision which obliges drivers to take a regular weekly rest period at least once per two consecutive weeks and the provisions which prescribe that under no circumstances should a daily rest period be less than an uninterrupted period of nine hours. Since those provisions guarantee adequate rest, and also taking into account experience with enforcement practices during the past years, a system of compensation for reduced daily rest periods is no longer necessary.
It mentions various provisions, several times. Provisions by which maximum driving times and minimum rest periods are delivered.
Now then — The provision “which prescribe that under no circumstances should a daily rest period be less than an uninterrupted period of nine hours” is, the way I understand it, Article 8, item 2
- Within each period of 24 hours after the end of the previous daily rest period or weekly rest period a driver shall have taken a new daily rest period.
If the portion of the daily rest period which falls within that 24 hour period is at least nine hours but less than 11 hours, then the daily rest period in question shall be regarded as a reduced daily rest period.
Article 12 quite clearly gives the “permission” if you will, subject to reason, to depart Article 8. It qualifies that permision with . . .
Article 12:
. . . . . . . the driver may depart from Articles 6 to 9 to the extent necessary . . . .
Is that to reinforce the “suitable stopping place” aspect ?(rh) As in — It wouldn’t be necessary to continue on to a “prefered” parking place. So you should/must park in the next legally available, safe place. Regardless of any “company policy” about laybys, for instance.
Geebee45 (I think) mentioned or alluded to the “time off between shifts” - for want of a better description.
Well, wasn’t “time off between shifts” one of the primary reasons for a previous re-write of the Rules ?(rh) Who else remembers the days of working 14/15/16/17 hours then taking 11 hours off to start again. We’d had the prescribed 11 (or 9) hours daily rest. No ?
So it was re-worded to make it plain and simple that the 11 (9) hours needs to be within 24 hours of starting. The next day is a new day, a new period of accounting for time. The only reference to separate days I can see is in relation to extending the driving period and the number of reduced rest periods in a week.
On that point again . . . . . . If I claim an Article 12 departure, I physically can’t comply with the standard requirements It isn’t possible. . Hence the very provision of Article 12.
To reiterate the point about the Guidence Notes — The “Daily Rest Period” as prescribed does not, and cannot exist. And it’s allowed to not exist, by the vitue of Article 12.
With reference to “the time between shifts” — To be prosecuted (for taking 8 hours off) would be to be prosecuted for not complying with the spirit of the law, as opposed to the letter of the law.
Dodgy ground indeed.
Of course, the whole thing would be nil and void if Article 12 ended with geebee’s words . . . . . . . .
geebee45:
In this instance you must still have a daily rest period; 11 hours which may be reduced to 9 if the option is available.
But it doesn’t.
In fact, the whole thing, the more I look at it is beginning to fall into the same catergory of buffooness that says if you drive for ten hours in a day, you must take 11 hours daily rest, or you’re in danger of showing 12 hours driving within a 24 hour period - PMSL
Bored yet ?
Oops.
Have I broken the quote thing ?
I could see what you were alluding to from the start which is why I asked geebee45 to give the VOSA definitive on this. Whatever they say is the way we must do it which makes it easier for us simpletons to understand 
If they look at this differently over the water then that is up to those enforcement agencies.
dambuster:
Oops.Have I broken the quote thing ?
You had, but i fixed it. I’m guessing you prepared your post in Word and the’wrong type’ of quotation marks were used. 
dambuster:
In fact, the whole thing, the more I look at it is beginning to fall into the same catergory of buffooness that says if you drive for ten hours in a day, you must take 11 hours daily rest, or you’re in danger of showing 12 hours driving within a 24 hour period - PMSL
Eh? 
ROG:
I could see what you were alluding to from the start which is why I asked geebee45 to give the VOSA definitive on this. Whatever they say is the way we must do it which makes it easier for us simpletons to understandIf they look at this differently over the water then that is up to those enforcement agencies.
Ah now.
That’s the greater part of my angst.
“What Vosa say”
“Vosa” have said"
No. I’m sorry Roger. That’s not quite good enough. I’m not wanting to disrespect Geebee, or anyone else, but that’s too much like “No extra charge after midnight” for me.
But apparently, “Vosa have said” they will prosecute anyone running with a 20’ box with the slider in the 40’ position (skellys/containers) even if the box is empty
As far as I’m aware, Vosa are enforcers of the law, not makers of the law. Nor are they judge and jury.
Yes, I can see the value of paying an easy 60 quid fine to make something go away, but taking things to the final nth, there has to be clarity. And how many 60 quids can we stand ?
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
Oops.Have I broken the quote thing ?
You had, but i fixed it. I’m guessing you prepared your post in Word and the’wrong type’ of quotation marks were used.
Yeah, I tried different fonts in word, but still couldn’t fix it.
I’m having problems with the “Post a reply” box. After a few lines of type it goes a little haywire and the cursor won’t stay in view.
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
In fact, the whole thing, the more I look at it is beginning to fall into the same catergory of buffooness that says if you drive for ten hours in a day, you must take 11 hours daily rest, or you’re in danger of showing 12 hours driving within a 24 hour period - PMSLEh?
PMSL.
Honestly. Someone in a position of quasi authority, and that should have known far better - before ringing Vosa for clarification - was “instructing” drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily rest 
For fun, can you guess his reasoning ?
(It did make me smile)
dambuster:
Honestly. Someone in a position of quasi authority, and that should have known far better - before ringing Vosa for clarification - was “instructing” drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily restFor fun, can you guess his reasoning ?
Are you referring to my good self?
the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily rest
Taking a 10 what - break - driving 
dambuster:
ROG:
I could see what you were alluding to from the start which is why I asked geebee45 to give the VOSA definitive on this. Whatever they say is the way we must do it which makes it easier for us simpletons to understandIf they look at this differently over the water then that is up to those enforcement agencies.
Ah now.
That’s the greater part of my angst.
“What Vosa say”
“Vosa” have said"
No. I’m sorry Roger. That’s not quite good enough. I’m not wanting to disrespect Geebee, or anyone else, but that’s too much like “No extra charge after midnight” for me.
But apparently, “Vosa have said” they will prosecute anyone running with a 20’ box with the slider in the 40’ position (skellys/containers) even if the box is empty
As far as I’m aware, Vosa are enforcers of the law, not makers of the law. Nor are they judge and jury.
VOSA give us their interpretation of the law as it stands and therefore their interpretation is what will be used if stopped.
If you think VOSA are incorrect then you can always hire a lawyer and take the issue to court.
The court will then make a ruling.
If an issue can be seen more than one way then the sensible thing is to invite an EXPERT to give a definitive on how the issue will be handled - this is what has happened - The EXPERT (geebee45) was invited by me to give such a definitive and he has kindly done so - Thanks again geebee45
If you think that other VOSA people will view it differently then you can always print off what the expert has said and take it with you.
Or
If you PM the expert and ask nicely then they may send you something more ‘concrete’ to which you can show other VOSA people if you need to 
ROG:
VOSA give us their interpretation of the law as it stands and therefore their interpretation is what will be used if stopped.
If you think VOSA are incorrect then you can always hire a lawyer and take the issue to court.
The court will then make a ruling.
I couldn’t agree more.
Just as “the Ministry” (now Vosa) interpreted the old style “any/each” four and a half hour period. Similar to the “time of between shifts” debate. Both of which have been clarified by susequent re-writes of the Rules
This whole thread is, by intent, not about what should be done, what the right thing to do is, or about opinion. It’s about “Nitpicking the Regulations” It’s about what has been written by the great and the good as law (for want of a better word) of what is, and what isn’t allowed.
ROG:
If an issue can be seen more than one way then the sensible thing is to invite an EXPERT to give a definitive on how the issue will be handled - this is what has happened - The EXPERT (geebee45) was invited by me to give such a definitive and he has kindly done so - Thanks again geebee45If you think that other VOSA people will view it differently then you can always print off what the expert has said and take it with you.
Or
If you PM the expert and ask nicely then they may send you something more ‘concrete’ to which you can show other VOSA people if you need to
I see that as a very patronising response, and one that expresses opinion as fact.
I’m guessing the person with the username of “geebee45” is a Vosa employee, and I would hope an expert in his/her field, or at the very least has a better than working knowledge of the relevant legislation. I’m also grateful of their input.
I didn’t (I don’t think 
) bring Vosa into the equation, and would hate for this thread to turn, or be steered toward a Vosa-bashing or sycophantic Vosa worship thread.
I would hope it could stay pretty much on track about what’s written in black and white within the legislation.
ROG:
dambuster:
Honestly. Someone in a position of quasi authority, and that should have known far better - before ringing Vosa for clarification - was “instructing” drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily restFor fun, can you guess his reasoning ?
Are you referring to my good self?
the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily rest
Taking a 10 what - break - driving
Sorry - that should read “was ‘instructing’ drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taking a reduced daily rest”
(Not referring to your good self, ROG)
dambuster:
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
In fact, the whole thing, the more I look at it is beginning to fall into the same catergory of buffooness that says if you drive for ten hours in a day, you must take 11 hours daily rest, or you’re in danger of showing 12 hours driving within a 24 hour period - PMSLEh?
PMSL.
Honestly. Someone in a position of quasi authority, and that should have known far better - before ringing Vosa for clarification - was “instructing” drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily rest
For fun, can you guess his reasoning ?
(It did make me smile)
Other than the not allowed to drive more than 10 hours in a 24-hour period myth I couldn’t say for sure. One thing for sure, he is fully paid up member of that driver trainer club who are clueless idiots, which appears to be most of them.
I think I get the jist now -
You were saying that a driver trainer/instructor was saying to someone that they could not take a reduced daily rest if they had a 10 hour driving day…
If I have got that right - what a numpty driver trainer/instructor !!
dambuster:
I’m guessing the person with the username of “geebee45” is a Vosa employee
I, and many others, met geebee45 in his official capacity at the VOSA stand at Truckfest Peterborough 2009 and I do believe he was to be at the other Truckfest shows around the UK this year.
ROG:
I think I get the jist now -
You were saying that a driver trainer/instructor was saying to someone that they could not take a reduced daily rest if they had a 10 hour driving day…
If I have got that right - what a numpty driver trainer/instructor !!
CLINK, CHING That was the sound of the penny dropping. Finally
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
In fact, the whole thing, the more I look at it is beginning to fall into the same catergory of buffooness that says if you drive for ten hours in a day, you must take 11 hours daily rest, or you’re in danger of showing 12 hours driving within a 24 hour period - PMSLEh?
PMSL.
Honestly. Someone in a position of quasi authority, and that should have known far better - before ringing Vosa for clarification - was “instructing” drivers (there’s a hint there) that the fact of driving a ten, was enough to stop them taken a reduced daily rest
For fun, can you guess his reasoning ?
(It did make me smile)
Other than the not allowed to drive more than 10 hours in a 24-hour period myth I couldn’t say for sure. One thing for sure, he is fully paid up member of that driver trainer club who are clueless idiots, which appears to be most of them.
AND he tried to carpet me for daring to disagree with him 
But, it’s all part of life’s rich tapestry - eh 
dambuster:
Coffeeholic:
dambuster:
For fun, can you guess his reasoning ?(It did make me smile)
Other than the not allowed to drive more than 10 hours in a 24-hour period myth I couldn’t say for sure. One thing for sure, he is fully paid up member of that driver trainer club who are clueless idiots, which appears to be most of them.
AND he tried to carpet me for daring to disagree with him
But, it’s all part of life’s rich tapestry - eh
Yes, and great fun as well when you show these people up as not qualified for the job they do.
“You must not drive more than 10 hours in 24.”
“You must have 30 minutes break at or before 6 hours.”
“You can’t take a reduced daily rest at home.”
“You don’t need to enter your finishing location on the digi tacho if you are leaving the card in the slot while you are away.”
Just a few of the ‘discussions’ I’ve had with these idiots whose job description says they should know this stuff.