Two card shuffle

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
41

Zac_A:

stevieboy308:
Glad you eventually agree it was sub standard, got there in the end

Don’t forget to post Nick Denton’s response to your critique of his capabilities after you’ve made use of the contact details I gave you.

I don’t remember saying I was going to contact him, you do have a thing for thinking I’ve said stuff that I haven’t :laughing:

42

Griggs is appealing apparently citing hardship to his family. Don’t think he will succeed.

43

stevieboy308:

Acorn:

stevieboy308:
I don’t think anyone would bet their house or
a tin of beans that he was telling the truth.

.

If I actually did 4:29 driving then supervised a learner, I could do it straight away without a break so long as wasn’t on 6 hours of working time, the TC would say I’d need a break 1st, he’s wrong.

You’re right about stopping then showing it as other work. But that’s not what was happening in this case. The driver was magically Consisterly stopping at 4.29, then stopping cards.

What’s so surprising is whoever did the investigation didn’t look at prosecuting for fraudulent records!!

We all know what was happening! The TC said, even if his version was true, then he would need a break before supervising a learner, he wouldn’t, that’s the point I was making!

I think that what got lost in translation, is that he only pretended to be supervising the learner, using the learner’s driver card, whilst driving himself. That is why he didnt put his own card in slot two. Had he done so, and put it on ‘other work’, for what ever hours he had left before getting to 6 hours work, he’d have possibly gotten away with it.
I agree that the wording of the TC is poor, the needing of a 45 minute break after 4.5 hours driving is correct, but legally complicated because of the use of the other card.
Did he actually get stopped, using the other card, or was that surmised, because the rest of his story didn’t hold up?

I guess the latter, otherwise he would surely have been prosecuted for falsifying records…

44

stevieboy308:

Zac_A:

stevieboy308:
Glad you eventually agree it was sub standard, got there in the end

Don’t forget to post Nick Denton’s response to your critique of his capabilities after you’ve made use of the contact details I gave you.

I don’t remember saying I was going to contact him, you do have a thing for thinking I’ve said stuff that I haven’t :laughing:

And you do have a habit of missing the point: I’m challenging you to take your TN brownie pointing to the person you’re trying to get one over on, unless your aim is merely to be Big Man on TruckNet, rather than addressing an infuential person spouting inaccurate legal information.

45

Zac_A:

stevieboy308:

Zac_A:

stevieboy308:
Glad you eventually agree it was sub standard, got there in the end

Don’t forget to post Nick Denton’s response to your critique of his capabilities after you’ve made use of the contact details I gave you.

I don’t remember saying I was going to contact him, you do have a thing for thinking I’ve said stuff that I haven’t :laughing:

And you do have a habit of missing the point: I’m challenging you to take your TN brownie pointing to the person you’re trying to get one over on, unless your aim is merely to be Big Man on TruckNet, rather than addressing an infuential person spouting inaccurate legal information.

Thank you for the challenge, I decline.

I have a challenge for you, stop thinking I’ve said stuff that I haven’t :wink: