^^ ■■■■■■■ spell checker on phone! Should say still strapped to the trailer bed 
This thread has had over 2500 views, still know answer reference is shrink warp a recognised load restraint?
chester:
This thread has had over 2500 views, still know answer reference is shrink warp a recognised load restraint?
Nah, a Net is the answer (as previously given). Thats why the vehicles that do this work regular have them. My translation of what the OP says is almost an incrimination of his own employer who should of done a risk assesment of the load and instructions of how to load it. Of course i’d imagine if he gave anymore details of himself or his company then he’d lead himself or his company liable to a prosecution.
Oh and its “No answer” not “know answer” !! “shrink warp” is not gonna cut the mustard i don’t think, although i stand to be corrected as i’ve no idea what it is !!
That’ll be the next thing, I suppose … all goods must be banded with metal banding, then wrapped three times with a special type of shrink wrap, then welded to a metal pallet, then bolted to the load bed, then secured with chains and dogs … then, and only then, can it be loaded onto a curtainsider, but only if it’s fitted with load bearing curtains.
Chester let me help you out.
NO
How’s that??
chester:
This thread has had over 2500 views, still know answer reference is shrink warp a recognised load restraint?
From VOSA Load Safety pdf
“11.1 The safe carriage of pallets presents two main problems. Firstly there has to be considered
the stability of the items stacked on the pallet and secondly the restraint of the pallet and its
cargo on the vehicle platform. In the case of small containers and cased machinery, usually
only the second factor needs be considered. When banding or other similar means are used
to unitise a pallet and its cargo it is most important to appreciate that the banding etc. is
intended only to keep the pallet and cargo together. Therefore it will be necessary to secure
the entire unit to the vehicle. Securing the pallet alone is not sufficient”
From this I take it that banding or shrinkwrapping a pallet is capable of unitising a pallet but not as a load restraint to keep the unit pallet on the vehicle.
Shrink/stretch wrap (properly applied and of appropriate strength) will keep items on a pallet. This makes the pallet easier to handle during loading/unloading and may help prevent GiT damage.
But it won’t keep the pallet on a vehicle, so it’s not load restraint, any more than pouring liquid into a barrel is.
You can’t say the trailer in the OP’s picture has been loaded: it’s just had items placed in it at random.
If someone ‘loaded’ a trailer like that in Germany they’d be sacked. Why have those barrels been balanced in the middle of the trailer?
F-reds:
Chester let me help you out.NO
How’s that??
Why are many drivers risking lives and their livelihood thinking shrink wrap is a restraint?
Why are major operators restraining 26 pallets with 2 internal straps?
I’ve posted about these operators on my posts in the last couple of years.
Green wagons
Yellow wagons
Hint 
How’s that for your starter for 10?
chester:
F-reds:
Chester let me help you out.NO
How’s that??
Why are many drivers risking lives and their livelihood thinking shrink wrap is a restraint?
Why are major operators restraining 26 pallets with 2 internal straps?I’ve posted about these operators on my posts in the last couple of years.
Green wagons
Yellow wagons
HintHow’s that for your starter for 10?
When was the last time you saw any of Carlisles finest parked in a VOSA checkpoint?
SteveBarnsleytrucker:
When was the last time you saw any of Carlisles finest parked in a VOSA checkpoint?
Why would you think it was a haulier from Carlisle?
Do you honestly believe non of them lot have been pulled?
Before this thread gets out of hand. I was pulled out by my boss who subbed me to a firm “a big company apparently” who did not confirm to the FTA code of practice 2002. Hence my question? is shrink wrap a recognised load restraint?
chester:
Before this thread gets out of hand. I was pulled out by my boss who subbed me to a firm “a big company apparently” who did not confirm to the FTA code of practice 2002. Hence my question? is shrink wrap a recognised load restraint?
I think the answer is in the wording (wrap)
chester:
Before this thread gets out of hand. I was pulled out by my boss who subbed me to a firm “a big company apparently” who did not confirm to the FTA code of practice 2002. Hence my question? is shrink wrap a recognised load restraint?
I would have thought that this is quite clear on the subject:
From VOSA Load Safety pdf
"11.1 The safe carriage of pallets presents two main problems.
Firstly there has to be considered the stability of the items stacked on the pallet
and secondly the restraint of the pallet and its cargo on the vehicle platform.
When banding or other similar means are used to unitise a pallet and its cargo it is most important to appreciate that the banding etc. is intended only to keep the pallet and cargo together. Therefore it will be necessary to secure
the entire unit to the vehicle. Securing the pallet alone is not sufficient
IE shrink wrap OK for keeping stuff on pallet, something else needed to keep pallet on truck.
Comprende?
Chester,
I don’t why you keep asking the same thing. No person that has posted so far has said that wrap is a form of restraint. It only keeps items on a pallet, not the pallet to the wagon.
Just because some “major hauliers” do it, or just use 2 internal straps, doesn’t make it right, it does make it a course of conduct for those firms. They would likely struggle in court.
I believe you mark your own scorecard in life, when I haul a load, it may not conform to the FTA code of practice, but it does conform to MY code of practice.
its getting boring now, if you need to ask the question you should be doing another job,any driver on general haulage knows what to do, oops got to go got some roping & sheeting to do 
F-reds:
Chester,I believe you mark your own scorecard in life, when I haul a load, it may not conform to the FTA code of practice, but it does conform to MY code of practice.
As long as YOUR code of practice supersedes the FTA edt 2002 you won’t fall foul then will you.
I’m sure I won’t there big fella.
If it ain’t safe, it don’t move. End of.
Out interest. Is the FTA COP (see what I did there 
) some sort of blanket of legal responsibility. For example, if you had followed it to the letter, and you still lost your load, would you be exempt from from prosecution?
Thought not. They would be lubing your ■■■■■■■ and leading you away to the TC, all the while you’d be saying, “but it complied with FTA COP 2002…”