Corporate Manslaughter and Driving at Work

This could be a biggie.

Or it could just disappear like much of this legislation as no judge wants to be the first to hand down a sentence.

The fact is that there's loads of legislation to safeguard drivers at work, but until recently the fact that your driver had a license and was insured, and the vehicle was safe and legal was all that employers looked at.

With recent focus shifting to training and Health and Safety, the ambulance chasing "no win, no fee" solicitors have started getting in on the act, leading to more prosecutions of companies who haven't risk assessed or trained their drivers.

If a company employs a 17 year old who has just passed their test in a Corsa to drive a 3.5 tonne long wheel base van, would you expect them to take some time to risk assess and train this driver?

So would I.

In many small companies this is done by the company owner - all informally and to be honest this often works reasonably well. All that is needed for this kind of company is for the "risk assessment" to be formalised and recorded and for the training to be agreed and successful in proving that the driver is now safe in the vehicle.

In larger companies this process is taken in hand by the fleet or HR management, who will usually employ one of the big fleet training providers to complete this process.

The problem occurs in the medium sized companies - the ones who have grown beyond the ability for the boss to sit in for a day or so, but haven't yet put the procedures in place to ensure that the assessment and training process takes place.

These are often the same companies who have yet to formalise procedures for drivers or even start recording license details on a regular basis.

These are the companies who may be most at risk from driver legislation.

Save yourself a problem - get your fleet assessed and trained.

More info:
Corporate Manslaughter - Guidance from the Ministry of Justice

Corporate Manslaughter - Help from the HSE

Corporate Manslaughter - Guide for Fleet Managers from BusinessCar

Corporate Manslaughter & Driving - Info from a fleet driver trainer

Will it lead to more work for Fleet ADIs?

Well it probably will, but as always the majority of companies who take the time to comply with H&S legislation are usually the ones who don't really need to.

Until there is a big prosecution most companies will do the minimum necessary amount of training. The short term view will always be prevalent across industry.

Luckily there are some companies who take the lead and run with it - these guys are reaping the rewards, both financially and in terms of business efficiency.

Good luck to them.

Would you?

You've had a long day and you need to get home.

There's been people hastling you all day and you just want to get away from them, your mate's best friend offers to drive you, but you know he's been in the bar most of the evening and you reckon he's probably over the limit, but he's a trained professional driver and your mate tells you he's good at his job.

You and your three friends decide you'll risk it (the people in the hotel where you're staying are really hastling you and you just want to get away).

You get in the car, but you notice that the people hastling you are now beginning to get on mopeds and in cars to follow you - damn.

The guy driving knows you just want to get away from them, if that means going quick then so be it.

You want to keep an eye on them, so you don't put your seat belt on - you can keep an eye on where they are this way. The driver is going pretty quick, still trying to get away from the guys following you. You know they only want to chat and take photos, but they're sooooo annoying.

You're now trying to get away from them through the centre of a busy city, through tunnels, in a high powered Mercedes - pretty exciting stuff really.

.........

You find yourself crushed into the footwell, in massive amounts of pain.

You black out.

You wonder whose fault it was?

Front fog lights when it isn't foggy........WWWHHHYYY?????!!!!!

Just a quickie - but I just don't get it - why?

Are you just thick - and have left them on since it was foggy (3 or 4 months ago) but have turned your rear ones off?

Or are you so sad as to think they look "cool"?

Or are you such an incompetent person that you didn't even know they were on?

Come on guys - turn em off!

I don't know why it drives me mad this one, but.....it does.

Illegal number plates and driving tests

The DSA are tightening up their stance on illegal number plates according to their latest press release:

DSA Illegal Number Plates Statement

The fact that they are going to start reporting them is good, but on some of the forums I've noticed a distinct "who cares" attitude to this problem - even from DSA examiners themselves.

There's a few problems with illegal number plates:

1. Speed cameras sometimes have trouble picking them out, which means that the 4x4 that just blasted past you in the wrong lane on the roundabout will not get his cummuppance.
2. When reported to the police, these plates are often mis-quoted and regularly come back as being not registered to a car. Hit and run accidents with illegal number plates are often not traceable for this reason.
3. They're just plain tacky.
4. They show that the person is happy breaking one law - why not a few more? Is the car actually insured for the test?

So please guys - don't just report them - refuse to take tests in them.

Also - if they're illegal - could the people who make these plates up not be prosecuted? I genuinely don't know the answer to this one, but I'm reasonably sure that someone will email me the answer! Thanks.

The Right to Drive?

The new driver act has kicked in - and we've all had the phone call from the distraught 18 year old who feels hard done by when they have their licence removed from them.

"But I only got 2 - I was doing 32 in a 30, and the second one was for being on me fone - I thought you had to get six points before you were banned?!"

Hmmm - just in case anyone has not understood the stupidity of the above - let me explain:

Many driving offences carry a different penalty point weighting. It just so happens that a speeding camera fine is usually 3 points, as is talking on your mobile phone. So with those two stupid actions - 6 points and if you passed your test less than 2 years ago - you're back to square 1 - take your test again.

Also - "32 in a 30" - do you think we're thick? You wouldn't trigger a camera until you were going 33, or more likely 35 or above.

Grrrr!

I love these phone calls - I'm always polite, and I will always accept someone if they have learnt with me, or if they understand what they have done, and why they shouldn't have, but the ones who are just angry that "everyone's gettin at me - shutup, shutup, oh whateva" can go hang.

Unfortunately, though I personally think this is a great idea - I understand that it has had a very limited effect on road safety.

In fact - it may even have made things worse. People who have been banned start driving illegally. They have got used to driving and had begun to take it for granted, so when it is taken away they decide to continue, not understanding the dangers and life wrecking stupidity of what they are doing.

And this leads me to the main problem with all of this - what can the police do? What do the police do? Surely impounding every car that is driven on the road without insurance, tax, or MOT would go some way toward solving the problem. Then link any release fee directly to the cost of the policing, the impound and the paperwork of the operation (2 coppers - 2 hours, 1 administrator - 1 hour, 1 recovery truck - 3 hours, 1 compound - 3 days, maybe around £500, with an extra £100 per day until someone who is insured for the car itself turns up to collect it!).

Criminals would no longer have cars. This may help the fight against normal crime too just a little!

Young Male Drivers

We've all been one. Well, half of us have. Well, the half of us who're male and learnt to drive before we were 21 were anyway.

Hell, you get the idea.

Showing off, pushing ourselves and our cars - I know I did it, but did I do anything completely stupid? I'm not sure if I'm honest - I know I made a few bloody silly mistakes though. I was never really the type to show off much, but not engaging the brain before engaging the gear? Yep, that was me.

After watching ITV1's program "Crash Scene Investigators" tonight I distinctly had the feeling that I'm glad to be here several years later.

We all know the stats - the number one killer of young women is the men who drive them around.

If there's a better argument for feminism I'm not sure I've heard it yet.

The only way to do anything when attitude is the main cause - make them want to be better drivers.

Until we can make driving well fashionable we will have trouble. Advanced driving is boring - it's a load of old duffers telling us we need to be better before we can speed. It needs to be repackaged, rebranded, and have a qualification that people understand - NOT 5 DIFFERENT ONES.

Lets have 1 standard that we can all aim for - a standard above the L-test that all drivers should have to attain before they can use their driving at work. Maybe we should all have to display our standard when driving - L-plates, FLH, Advanced, etc. Then people could decide whether they want to get into a car with someone who hasn't got the advanced licence yet.

Maybe we should have to display our insurance too - and make this obvious - so that those girls can see if they're getting in a car with someone who isn't insured.

Then with some serious education, lets get people thinking that risk taking in a car is really pretty pathetic (small dick syndrome - I reckon someone should do scientific studies - I reckon we could prove this one!), and that there's an easy solution - get out of the car driven by the pratt.

One final suggestion - make advanced tests of all types accessible. Let people get on a skid pan and get scored on it. Get more people to take up track days - settle the "who's fastest" thing once and for all. Score people on their control skills, their observational skills. Begin a "Britain's best driver" contest. Have a national league table that people can log into and see how well they're doing. See the people who take training rise to the top, and the loons fall to the bottom.

Reward the ones who win.

Prove who is the best - accurately.

Make the ones who feel they're better than they are face the truth.

Why worry about Driving Test fraud?

So, around 10,000 people have got driving licences by fraudulent means - should we really be worried?

Well yes, obviously, but isn't it slightly more important that 400,000 people (40 times as many) are driving around with no insurance?

And what about all the people who drive around having never passed a test in the first place?

How many of those new drivers who have been banned under the 6 point scheme are still driving?

Don't look to me for answers though, you wouldn't like the suggestions.

Oh all right then, you twisted my arm!

• Immediate removal of the vehicle if uninsured or driven illegally - only releaseable on a legal driver turning up with 20% of the cost of the car as a release fee or it gets sold - use the proceeds to pay more police. (I know the problems with this, but don't rightly care - more police please, with more powers to take cars off the road)
• Insurance disc should be shown on windscreen.
• Drivers should have to display their driver's licence in the windscreen like Driving Instructors do.

Driving Me Crazy - John Sargeant on 4x4's

Oh, I know that ITV can't do serious programming and that their target audience has an IQ of less than 83, but at least they tried!!

One thing that did get me thinking though was the difference in the driving once they changed from their tanks into normal cars. I've noticed this before, especially with women (sorry guys, but....!) who drive 4x4's and actually feel very vulnerable when brought down to a normal level.

Now unless we are to have an arms race on car sizes, something is going to have to happen. Once it has happened (probably with taxation, because it's the only language that fashion victims understand, until we can convince them that smaller cars are less "thick" than 4x4's or any other gas guzzlers) there will be a huge demand for defensive driving courses in order to stop people feeling nervous in smaller cars!

So sign up for my new course:

Newly divorced from your 4x4?
Was it a painful split?
Left feeling nervous and unconfident about your new car relationship?
Let the Undercover ADI renew your driving confidence!
Regain the ability to be polite to other drivers, regain the ability to understand how other road users react, regain the ability to feel comfortable driving your car!

We guarantee that we will actually save you TEN TIMES the cost of your course within 1 year of taking it.
How?
Fuel savings of up to £800/year based on changing from a petrol 4x4 to a diesel small car.
Tax savings of over £100/year, not including reduced parking and congestion charges for those based in London
Car savings of up to and over £20,000 on your new, smaller car!!!!

Who could resist?

Why are Police so soft on driving offences?

I'm not sure of this - I'm wondering if any of you can help me?

It seems to me that motoring offences like driving without a licence, insurance, MOT and the like are reasonably clear cut and simple to prosecute. So why are people getting away with it so often?

I'm no fan of simplistic rules for how laws should be enforced, as life is bloody complicated, but I would've thought that being caught without any of the above should get a fine and endorsement. Getting caught twice should lead to a ban, and getting caught 3 times should lead to community service.

All drivers caught for other offenses like mobile phone use or speeding should have all of these things checked as a matter of course.

Many criminals use stolen or un-registered cars to carry out their business, and when caught seem not to be prosecuted for anything - often drugs found in cars cannot be linked to the driver or a passenger and so are hard to prosecute for, but the issues with the legality of the car are ignored! These should be simple to fix - any un-registered car found on the road should be impounded.

Insurance seems to be awkward to prove on a day to day basis, so surely we should have to carry proof of insurance with us, which could be easily verified. I know there are issues with the data protection act on this one, but it should not be beyond the imagination of a civilised culture to come up with a simple solution that could easily prove that people are insured.

No insurance - the car should be impounded until insurance is proved.

No license - immediate arrest, car should be impounded.

No MOT - car should be impounded.

With all of these impounds they should have to pay to have the car released - and if the car is not claimed within a certain period it should be sold to pay for the impound costs and to continue and increase the policing.

This is one of my less ranting posts (apologies to those who prefer the rants - I'll do one on how offenders should have to pay EVERY cost of their offence soon!), so I hope the principle may be considered.

The Retests are Coming!

Well, for bus & truck drivers they are anyway. Recent changes to the system mean that these drivers will probably have to retake their test every 5 years.

Many local authorities also expect cab drivers to do the same, and with schools and businesses often specifying that their employees may not drive on business until they have passed a driver assessment - how long can it take?

And it will never be too soon for the 3000 people who are killed on the roads every year.

It will never be too soon for the 28,000 people seriously injured, disabled and disfigured on britains roads every year.

£11.73 BILLION pounds is one of the estimated costs of bad driving every year.

That's £11,730,000,000 in real numbers. And to break that down into even more understandable figures, that's £586.50 for every driver.

And if you're not a driver - don't worry - you pay your share in taxes.

The worst bit is that many of these bad drivers don't pay a penny, because they aren't insured - and until they cause an accident, all they really risk is a small fine and a few points on their licence.

If anyone is listening - PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE.

Sorry guys - rant over.

Re-testing

Will it ever happen?

Will the insurance companies introduce it through the back door?

Do us a favour - post your views under the comments below.

Does the Insurance Industry Care about young drivers?

Doesn't seem like it.

Our lovely Mr Ladyman (no jokes please), has been answering some questions at the house of commons (and not answering others, but hell, he's a politician aint he?!).

One of the points which he was rightly concerned about was the death/serious injury rate of young drivers, including the fact that young men are 4 times more likely to kill themselves and others in their first year of driving than women.

He makes the point that though both sexes take the same test, the lads are nutters. Like we've said here before, it's not a case of passing the test, it's how they view driving - their attitude, that counts.

He also gives an opinion on the 6 points and you're banned scheme which has been running a while, and he feels that this is not effective. Now at first I thought - what? You must be joking - ban 'em and they'll learn their lesson, but of course they don't. Half of them never re-apply for their test - are we to assume that these people give up driving? Or do we reckon that a lot of them go on to drive illegally, without insurance, tax, and breaking the law in any way they feel? I suspect this is often the case, and will concede the point to Mr Ladyman - expect the law to change on this one sometime (don't expect soon though!).

One problem he does have is that just out of reach, he can see a huge quantity of information which could help him to work out the best course of action for making Britain's roads safer. Unfortunately, due to "commercial privacy" he can't get his hands on it. What are the insurance industry thinking? Do they care at all? It seems not.

With the help of this information, we might be able to make sensible, informed decisions on how to improve driver training. Without it - our insurance premiums stay high, young drivers keep on killing themselves and their girlfriends, but heck, at least the insurance companies get to keep their market share.

Read the transcript here:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtran/uc355-iii/uc35502.htm
(if you've got the patience - it's dull, but has some interesting facts in it)

Why don't people take refresher lessons?

There's enough people out there who need to!

But seriously, when talking to people, reading the forums, or simply watching people driving on the roads, you can see people really having trouble driving.

BUT THEY WON'T ASK FOR HELP!

And I don't understand why. Most of the things they have trouble with are simple to fix, like moving off on a hill, or parking in a bay - we could solve this in an hour if you wanted us to - 1 hour to solve that problem that stresses you out every time you get in a car! SO WHY DON'T YOU SOLVE IT!

Even more complex things - solving nerves, driving without stress, even reverse parking! We can help with all of these, but no - you'd rather stress yourself out and risk your own or someone else's death than ask for help. And all because "I've already passed my test". Well I've already had central heating installed - BUT IF IT DOESN'T WORK I'LL CALL A FRICKIN PLUMBER!

I'm not proud.

Is it pride, or selfishness. We get in that steel box and we feel that we are in charge, and admitting that actually we aren't in as much charge as we'd like is hard, but taking the central heating analogy again - i'm in control - I can change the temperature, and I can set it to come on when I want it to, but if it starts leaking water (or worse still Carbon Monoxide), I WILL call that plumber. I won't risk damage to my property or anyone else's, and I WILL NOT RISK MY LIFE OR THOSE OF MY FAMILY. And if I won't risk the life of my family - what gives you the right to.

(Oh yeah, and why is it that nervous drivers buy 4x4's instead of taking a few refresher lessons? Surely an extra £10 grand for a car is taking pride a bit too far. And it just means that they are more likely to kill the child they hit, because the bumper hits their hip and breaks it rather than their leg. Luckily, drivers of 4x4's are slightly more likely to die in an accident than normal car drivers. Maybe we could replace airbags in gas guzzlers (anything with an mpg less than 35, not just 4x4's) with large metal spikes that fire out through people's brains when they crash. Maybe then they'd stop talking on their phones.)

Can you tell I've had a hard week?!

Caught on Camera on your Mobile Phone!

This is just a warning to all of those people who think that driving around with a mobile phone clamped to their ear is a sensible thing to do - DRIVING INSTRUCTORS HAVE GOT YOU NICKED!

There's been a little research done into this, and all seems good!

In any one learner car at any one time there are usually 2 people - or shall we call them 'witnesses'.

In many learner cars, there are cameras - we use them for training purposes, and they often have cameras facing forwards, and backwards.

So if you like using your phone while driving, beware next time you are in front of, or behind a learner car, because we have been informed that if we supply video of you doing it, with the 2 witness statements confirming this to the police - you can be nicked!

3 points and a £60 fine coming your way guys - and there's a lot more learner cars around than police cars. And believe me, we WILL be doing this!

Be afraid - be very afraid!

Or just stop being a danger to yourself and everyone around you, you selfish fool.

Traffic Police

New York used to have a terrible problem with crime. It is widely believed that Rude old Giuliani fixed this with interesting, novel and intelligent schemes.

Cr*p. It was the fact that the guy who ran the place before him put loads more police on the streets. (Look it up - the economist Steven Levitt goes through all of this in 'Freakonomics')

Now I'm all for good ideas, progress and all that, but there is no frickin substitute for people thinking that if they drive like w*nkers then they'll get caught. Take the mobile fone thing - there is no way in hell this will change until everyone on them starts getting caught, fined and pointed. We have the same problem with speeding - slow down for 50 yards beyond the camera, then back to normal.

Average speed cameras may help. Cameras with technology to recognise whether someone is on the fone may help, but I don't think there are cameras which can recognise the guy who cuts you up, and there are many areas without any cameras at all.

When people know that they can't get away with something, they don't try.

Maybe someone should start counting the cost of poor driving across all factors:
Excess fuel use
Environmental impact
Stress, and stress related illness
Insurance increases
Accidents
Injuries
Police and emergency service response to accidents and injuries
Time off work through injury and stress

Then maybe we could weigh all of those up against the preventative costs of having a few more coppers around in brightly coloured cars.

Aphorism of the Day

Stop using your frickin phone, you selfish, arrogant git.

I think that says everything dunnit?

Suggestion for New Driver Insurance

As we all know, new drivers are the highest risk group on the road. What can we do to change their attitudes?

Well this is just a quick one, no long explanations or twisted logic.

When someone insures a car for the first time, give them the following info:

Quote - for this year.

Quote - for next year without claims, or points.

Quote - for next year with points (3 or 6 and re-test passed)

Quote - for next year after a fault claim.

Quote - for next year after a fault claim, combined with points.

Seeing a quote go from £1500 to £1200 to £3000 to 'insurance refused' in just a couple of lines might have an effect.

Maybe.

Why do drivers presume a car with L-plates on is going to hold them up?

I'm gonna admit something here I shouldn't.

I get pretty p*ssed off with just about everyone else on the road some days.
Then I get therapy and chill out again - but this one annoys the sh*t out of me!

During a lesson today - my bloke had done really well on his second lesson, and I was driving him home through some hellish junctions he didn't fancy trying (we'll do em next week I promise - but think about crossing a 4 lane road after your second lesson - yep!). There were no gaps, not even cheeky ones - it was chucking out time for the schools, and the (completely pointless) 4x4's were thundering by from both directions. But, because there were L-plates on the car - the guy behind presumed we must be holding him up so he beeped at us!

Donchajustluvvem! I seriously debated stalling it then rolling back into his stupid merc (are these guys given an exemption from the highway code when they buy one?), but then realised saying 'om' would be a much more positive, enlightening, and karmic thing to do.

It doesn't matter what you do - they see the L's and just have to go for you - it's like a target to them. When younger I retaliated - I sometimes miss that, but no - my reward will come when I have shuffled off this mortal coil (preferably taking some tw*t in a range rover sport out of the game with me - did I type that or just think it? sorry). I'll have lovely worms eating me (shame I'm not religeous innit!).