On friday morning there were two accidents on the M11, the first did not get much pulicity as the second (under the junction of the M25) caused more problems.
My point is this the first accident was caused when a M.O.D (bomb disposal squad) vehicle lost it’s wheels.Now the govements view on what is generally known as “wheel loss syndrome” is that is only caused by a significant maintainence failiure so will we be seeing a prosecution against the M.O.D (in effect the government itself) for this offence?
north surrey haulage:
Are you suggesting there are double standards within this government ?
double standards and hypocrisy Sean they are quite brazen about things really, and its not just this current govt, all of them run by the rule “do as we say, not as we do!” And sadly, thats exactly what happens.
if a military driver is involved in an accident and he is to blame then he gets charged and pays a fine.
however in a wheel loss situation and not an accident just like a civilian job the driver will get the blame. if this is down to maintenence the mt officer (cpc holder,transport manager) will get a roasting. i very much doubt a prosecution though.
as you said bomb disposal vehicle im not sure if you meant car,van or truck.
at present the mod still buys and runs it own trucks. however lighter vehicles are leased (they call it whitefleet) and are on contract maintenence through the leasing company, so if it is maintenance related the finger of prosecution could well point in that direction. and the government would prosecute a contractor.
dave by bomb disposal vehicle I mean 7.5t’er & I’m not sure how it works with the military but as the “operator” of the vehicle the responsibilty remains with them wether or not the vehicles are leased or not.
My lorry is maintained by volvo but if there is found to be a maitainence problem in a check I’ll still be the one prosecuted.
Wiretwister:
Crown immunity will be the reason nothing happens. However the driver…
I don’t think Crown immunity still exists whixh is why servicemen and women can take the MOD to court.
If the govenment won’t take the blame for lack of body armour leding to the death of a soldier then I doubt they will take any blame for the loss of a wheel.
I was a military driver.We had to do the daily checks, same as we do now (it was called first parade checks).
In the event of an accident a forces driver is automatically on a charge and has to answer to his, or her, commanding officer. In a minor accident that can result in a fine (from a day to a weeks pay) plus lose of privlidges (like normal work all day, plus community service type work, plus spending any normaly free time left in the jail) A major accident could be refered to a higher authority, ie court martial, which could result in real jail time plus getting thrown out of the forces with a bad reckord (try getting a job with one of those).
If the accident is proved to be caused by a maintainance failiure that the driver would not have picked up on first parade then the MTO (Motor Transport Officer) and or the REME workshop officer would be court martialled. If the accident resulted in a fatality then whoever is found responsible can expect jail time, reduced to the ranks and a dishonourable discharge. The forces can also remove your driving licence.
This outcome is unlikely to be in the public domain, but you can rest assured that whoever is responsible will not get off lightly. An officer found guilty is not likely to do jail time (except in the event of a civilian fatality), but will be passed over for promotion probably reprimanded etc(all that goes on their record) and holds back promotion and seniority for years. At first glance, that doesn’t seem much, but it adds up to £ thousands lost, and a loss of respect from all their peers because they couldn’t do the job properly. Not that light a sentence when the respect of you your peers is everything you’re working for. If you can’t do the job then you get passed over for other jobs with responsibility, so you can’t gain that experience, so you aren’t suitable for promotion and so it rolls on for years and years. Also bear in mind that the forces are a closed community, they don’t particulaly care about civilians oppinion of them but they care very deeply about the opinion of their peers so work very hard to gain that good opinion.
In effect, yes the government will in effect prosecute themselves. It won’t reach a civil court tho’.
Its crown immunity of sorts. The queen cant take herself to court (regina v regina) It happened with the Royal Mint a year or so back. Something on health & safety I believe, anyhow they had to use the privy council to sort it out legally. The driver can be prosecuted under army & cililian laws. (that is if its his fault)
soldiers are under the same rules out on the open road as you and i. if this was an accident that turned out to be fatal then he would be dealt with twice,he would be charged with the military and then charged with by the civvi police.but daily checks are to be carried out the same as we all do it,and it has nothing to do with the hired company nor the maintanence firm. it is the responceability of the said driver.
I can’t see them being prosecuted really. Have you had a look a the new drivers hours yet? They’ve simplyfied them because they can#t get the software for the tacho’s to work with the current hours and they have the gall to quote road safety as the reason.
2.The proposal aims to strike a balance between the flexibility in driving times, rest periods and
breaks provided in the existing legislation, and effective enforcement. It makes no material alteration to the driving time limits or the rest requirements, except to the extent necessary to rectify internal inconsistencies and complex daily and weekly rest compensation arrangements that, in some cases, would prevent the requirements of the current Regulation from being capable of computation by digital tachographs.
Now I can’t see them lifting a finger if that’s their attitude. Can you|?
kitkat:
daily checks are to be carried out the same as we all do it,and it has nothing to do with the hired company nor the maintanence firm. it is the responceability of the said driver.
The trouble with that theory is that not all faults can be detected by the walk round check.
For instance a subbie for the company I work for bought one of their old fleet vehicles, when they sell them to you they put them through a service prior to sale.The subbie then employed a driver and on his first job the wheel came off,but there is no way the driver could have detected this as the wheel nuts were not loose in fact the wheel was still bolted to the hub and the whole assembely came off.
You are right about one thing tho the buck still stops with the driver and in the eyes of the law regarding condition of the vehicle the opertor/subbie
The trouble with that theory is that not all faults can be detected by the walk round check
granted,i was only talking about the daily checks as you and i do first thing.
as for more serious mechanical stuff then i tend to leave that to the experts.
if something serious happens then i would like to think the former owner would foot the bill,as there would be a good chance he would have known about it.
