I’m after specific, accurate knowledge as to wether the trailer tyre in the picture is or is not illegal please. Not who would or would not take it out or not.
There is no metal cord showing when the rubber cut is lifted.
Thanks.
If there’s no metal cord showing then it’s legal.
Looks like it might be legal, if it’s under 25mm long and doesn’t expose the cord beneath …
Tyre Cuts
A cut in excess of 25mm or 10% of the section width of the tyre , whichever is greater, measured in any direction on the outside of the tyre and deep enough to reach the ply or cord would deem the tyre illegal.
Tyre ply or cord exposure
If there is any cut in the tyre no matter how small which exposes cords, then the tyre is illegal.
Yeah I’ll agree with RT.
Rhythm Thief:
Looks like it might be legal, if it’s under 25mm long and doesn’t expose the cord beneath …
Not according to Vosa. Taken from Enforcement Sanctions Policy March 2014
Tyre has lump, bulge or tear = £100 FPN and is endorsable. MSI An offence deemed to be a Most Serious Offence. Regardless of any action taken for any such offences during a vehicle encounter an investigation will be carried out to establish any shortcomings in the operator’s system. The outcome will be reported to the Traffic Commissioner. This process applies to GB licensed vehicles only. The Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986, Regulation 27(1)(d) and Section 41A of the Road Traffic Act 1988, SO-5-3pts
Tyre has break or cut = £100 FPN and is endorsable. The Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986, Regulation 27(1)(c) and Section 41A of the Road Traffic Act 1988, SO-5-3pts
From this link DVSA enforcement sanctions policy - GOV.UK
Legal
I would either stick it back in with some black mastic or take it off and give it a tidy with a regroover.
Isn’t that considered damage to the side wall ■■? which makes a tyre illegal…
Call a tyre company in …If in doubt…don’t take it out…
Swampey2418:
Isn’t that considered damage to the side wall ■■? which makes a tyre illegal…Call a tyre company in …If in doubt…don’t take it out…
No, the sidewall is below the banding slightly further down, this is tread.
Ok so the damage is above the side wall band but it still constitutes damage and what I’ve read its illegal to use a tyre with a lump, bulge or tear…
For initial DCPC, the answer that had to be given to the DSA examiner, when explaining what to look for RE tyre condition, was “cuts in excess of 1 inch”…
It does look dodgy though, and as you’re questioning it, I reckon you already know the answer to your underlying and specifically unasked question 
BTW, this legal mumbo-jumbo is the answer, if you can decipher it:
legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986 … on/27/made
Ok thanks lads, I know it’s not cricket but the majority view seems to be that it’s legal.
It’s tread, not sidewall. No chord showing under it & it isn’t that big. It does look minging though.
It’s a hire trailer, I’ll see what response I get…
I know my place would get that changed, then get the tyre inspected, if its good, it’ll be re-fitted
Rat67:
Rhythm Thief:
Looks like it might be legal, if it’s under 25mm long and doesn’t expose the cord beneath …Not according to Vosa. Taken from Enforcement Sanctions Policy March 2014
Tyre has lump, bulge or tear = £100 FPN and is endorsable. MSI An offence deemed to be a Most Serious Offence. Regardless of any action taken for any such offences during a vehicle encounter an investigation will be carried out to establish any shortcomings in the operator’s system. The outcome will be reported to the Traffic Commissioner. This process applies to GB licensed vehicles only. The Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986, Regulation 27(1)(d) and Section 41A of the Road Traffic Act 1988, SO-5-3pts
Tyre has break or cut = £100 FPN and is endorsable. The Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986, Regulation 27(1)(c) and Section 41A of the Road Traffic Act 1988, SO-5-3pts
From this link DVSA enforcement sanctions policy - GOV.UK
I wonder why it is that VOSA (or DVSA or whatever collection of initials they call themselves today) operate to their own standards which appear to be made up and independent of UK law? C&R regs - as quoted by Chris1207 - are fairly clear on this point, and coincide to an extent with VOSA’s position. But where C&R states that:
- (1) Save as provided in paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), a wheeled motor vehicle or trailer a wheel of which is fitted with a pneumatic tyre shall not be used on a road, if–
(a)the tyre is unsuitable having regard to the use to which the motor vehicle or trailer is being put or to the types of tyres fitted to its other wheels;
(b)the tyre is not so inflated as to make it fit for the use to which the motor vehicle or trailer is being put;
(c)the tyre has a cut in excess of 25 mm or 10% of the section width of the tyre, whichever is the greater, measured in any direction on the outside of the tyre and deep enough to reach the ply or cord;
(d)the tyre has any lump, bulge or tear caused by separation or partial failure of its structure;
with the bits I’ve put in bold being the important bits, VOSA seems to have simply decided that any break or cut, or lump or bulge, is enough to slap a fine and points on the driver. Why are construction and use regs saying one thing and VOSA, effectively, another?
Rhythm Thief:
Why are construction and use regs saying one thing and VOSA, effectively, another?
Interesting and thought provoking post RT. it’ll only come to a head when a drivers says “no, I’m not gonna pay your FPN, take me to court instead”. It’ll be an interesting test case which’ll either result in VOSA having their wings clipped or be given carte blanche to interpret any law whichever way they see fit.
the maoster:
Rhythm Thief:
Why are construction and use regs saying one thing and VOSA, effectively, another?Interesting and thought provoking post RT. it’ll only come to a head when a drivers says “no, I’m not gonna pay your FPN, take me to court instead”. It’ll be an interesting test case which’ll either result in VOSA having their wings clipped or be given carte blanche to interpret any law whichever way they see fit.
They do on a lot of things by the looks of it.
No offence to anyone here, but go get it checked out it’s YOUR LICENSE,
better double checking with Ats etc
nick2008:
the maoster:
Rhythm Thief:
Why are construction and use regs saying one thing and VOSA, effectively, another?Interesting and thought provoking post RT. it’ll only come to a head when a drivers says “no, I’m not gonna pay your FPN, take me to court instead”. It’ll be an interesting test case which’ll either result in VOSA having their wings clipped or be given carte blanche to interpret any law whichever way they see fit.
They do on a lot of things by the looks of it.
Quite true Nick. Maybe they need challenging. Any takers?
If it’s middle axle, no problem. Anywhere else, watch it like a hawk. I have used superglue before now with complete success, still holding when tyre is worn out
i was told by a VOSA examiner, that as long as the cut was less than 25mm, and not showing the chords, then it is fine
make of that what you wish
Gotta agree with Fallmonk on this one… get it checked out it’s YOUR LICENSE… IF in doubt, don’t talk it out… Shouldn’t matter which axle wheel it is