brit pete:
Hate to say this but we carried ADR goods in the containers
in liquid form, the trailers were new as well .what we also had
replaced in the last 7years were the metal chocks with plastic ones
Agreed Pete, I’ve noticed that too. 
brit pete:
as for chocks well DIESIL DAVE mate i have been driving before i stopped work trailers with the chocks connected by a 4meter chain and the police never said any thing mate ; This was how the most of our container trailers were outfitted,but not the road-tankers .
Hi Pete,
Just another thought on this point you made…
I’m not surprised that the police said nothing about that in a control, because neither I nor the StVZO said/says anything about the chocks being connected to each other by a chain.
All I meant to say was that hooks or chains can’t be used as a carrier or to support the chocks on the vehicle as you can read in the quote from StVZO above.
@dieseldave the chocks were not connected together
but seperate and each had a chain which was fixed on
the chock and trailer mate,as well as having there own stowage
(halterung) place
brit pete:
@dieseldave the chocks were not connected together
but seperate and each had a chain which was fixed on
the chock and trailer mate,as well as having there own stowage
(halterung) place
Hi Pete,
Yes mate, that sounds better, but the way I read your other post above made it seem to me that the chocks were connected to each other. Of course, it would have been legal if they were. Actually, it does seem a good idea to use chains for the very purpose that Malc suggested.
At least jj72 now knows that he wasn’t dreaming about wheel-chocks needing to be readily accessible.
It was just a case of finding the relevant law on the subject, because I already knew that ADR says nothing about the accessibility of wheel-chocks.
The way that StVZO is written makes no distinction between dangerous and non-dangerous goods.