Two Plates on my Wagon, the Sequel

[Stevan]

2 minutes ago, Black Grouse said:

 

What we have is an utterly ludicrous situation in the caravan industry - but then it is the caravan industry!

You could also blame the legislators, after all, laws are put in place by politicians, and we know how logical and consistent they are!

[Lutz]

7 minutes ago, Black Grouse said:

Surely, Road Traffic Regulations are written/enforced in the expectation of a single GVW/MTPLM on a vehicle/trailer.

What we have is an utterly ludicrous situation in the caravan industry - but then it is the caravan industry!

It's not really the caravan manufacturers themselves, but the fact that the NCC is meddling around in the system by creating their own 'plate', which is entirely uncalled for and only serves to confuse.

[Black Grouse]

1 minute ago, Lutz said:

It's not really the caravan manufacturers themselves, but the fact that the NCC is meddling around in the system by creating their own 'plate', which is entirely uncalled for and only serves to confuse.

The NCC is the trade body for the UK caravan industry !!!

[Steamdrivenandy]

Surely it's not the NCC's fault, Continental manufacturers must run up against the same issue with a chassis/axle limit that is heavier than the MTPLM they wish to impose, or do do all their vans have equilibrium and axle/chassis limit matches MTPLM?  

[Lutz]

5 minutes ago, Black Grouse said:

The NCC is the trade body for the UK caravan industry !!!

It's still an independent body, though, even though their membership includes some if not all manufacturers. Dealers, distributors, suppliers and even campsite organisations are also represented in their membership.

Perhaps they should stick to representing trade interests, which is their main purpose,  rather than assuming powers of a bogus legislative authority.

[Lutz]

15 minutes ago, Steamdrivenandy said:

Surely it's not the NCC's fault, Continental manufacturers must run up against the same issue with a chassis/axle limit that is heavier than the MTPLM they wish to impose, or do do all their vans have equilibrium and axle/chassis limit matches MTPLM?  

No, for Continental manufacturers the position is quite clear. Any chassis/axle plates are only relevant to Stage 1 build, i. e. to the caravan manufacturer. For the finished product, the caravan manufacturer's plate takes final priority over any other plates. The same applies to motorhomes. The chassis manufacturer, say Fiat, applies a plate, but it's the one of the motorhome manufacturer, such as Swift for example, that counts.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lutz

[fred]

7 minutes ago, Steamdrivenandy said:

Surely it's not the NCC's fault, Continental manufacturers must run up against the same issue with a chassis/axle limit that is heavier than the MTPLM they wish to impose, or do do all their vans have equilibrium and axle/chassis limit matches MTPLM?  

I think in reality continental vans are plated at their maximum.   As they only display one plate the, statutory plate, I would have thought whatever is on that is the limit. This assumes that what’s on the plate does not exceed other limitations such as axle loads etc.

It would be interesting if Legaleagle could go back to his original source and ask what regulation allows them to enforce and prosecute ( actually or not in the case of a restricted licence), some who is driving something that would be legal according to the statutory plate   

 

[Lutz]

22 minutes ago, fred said:

I think in reality continental vans are plated at their maximum.   As they only display one plate the, statutory plate, I would have thought whatever is on that is the limit. This assumes that what’s on the plate does not exceed other limitations such as axle loads etc.

It would be interesting if Legaleagle could go back to his original source and ask what regulation allows them to enforce and prosecute ( actually or not in the case of a restricted licence), some who is driving something that would be legal according to the statutory plate   

 

Continental manufacturers do normally plate their caravans with an MTPLM equal to the maximum permitted axle load. However, the MTPLM is the sum of the axle load and the noseweight, so theoretically, one can only make full use of the plated maximum axle load if the noseweight is zero. As that is not normally the case (at least it shouldn't be) the manufacturer is effectively making a slight restriction there, maybe in the interest of increasing the margin of safety.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lutz

[Borussia 1900]

My caravan has its own VRN and its own registration document (exactly the same as my car does), if the authorities pulled me over here they wouldn't look at any plates, they would ask for my registration document which I'm obliged to have with me and it states quite clearly on there what my max weight is, I'm guessing this is not the case in the UK???

[Black Grouse]

5 minutes ago, Borussia 1900 said:

My caravan has its own VRN and its own registration document (exactly the same as my car does), if the authorities pulled me over here they wouldn't look at any plates, they would ask for my registration document which I'm obliged to have with me and it states quite clearly on there what my max weight is, I'm guessing this is not the case in the UK???

UK authorities will check plates, not pieces of paper.

[Lutz]

17 minutes ago, Borussia 1900 said:

My caravan has its own VRN and its own registration document (exactly the same as my car does), if the authorities pulled me over here they wouldn't look at any plates, they would ask for my registration document which I'm obliged to have with me and it states quite clearly on there what my max weight is, I'm guessing this is not the case in the UK???

Of course there is no equivalent registration document for trailers in the UK so the powers-that-be have to revert to plated figures, but anyway the details of the German registration document must agree with what is shown on the statutory plate. The TÜV can, and often do, check that this is the case when the vehicle is submitted for test.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lutz

[Durbanite]

I seem to recall many years ago Lutz started the same argument on a forum about the MTPLM sticker.   A forum member then wrote to VOSA and got back a reply stating virtually word for word what Legal Eagle has stated yet Lutz still disagrees with it.   The reply from VOSA was printed in a post on that forum and I have always used that information when stating that there is no requirement for the MTPLM sticker on the body of a caravan.   Since about Oct 2012 I think all trailers incl. caravans now have a mandatory plate on the chassis of the trailer and not the body.  

For a successful prosecution the police would probably use the load rating on the tyres or the mandatory plate on the trailer chassis.   Load rating on the tyres is a hard one to fight as you are then probably breaking more than one law so if the one does not stick the other will.

However it is always good practice to stay within the manufacturer's MTPLM guidelines.

[fred]

Speaking pragmaticaly, Two things strike me.

Firstly if you are stopped and checked then there are probably very few real world possibilities that you will be over the NCC plate but under the statutory plate.   

Secondly if your licence allows it is probably wise to remove the NCC plate, it seems to be agreed that, that is not an offence.

Finally a question if a caravan is for example type approval at 1800kg, but the NCC plate states 1600kg, what rating do the tyres have to achieve?

[Lutz]

Is it not legitimate to question what has been written, by whatever source, about the need for a statutory plate on an O2 trailer until someone can actually reference that piece of current legislation that exempts them? Maybe I have got things wrong, but I'd like to know where I've made a mistake.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lutz

[Borussia 1900]

10 minutes ago, Lutz said:

Of course there is no equivalent registration document for trailers in the UK so the powers-that-be have to revert to plated figures, but anyway the details of the German registration document must agree with what is shown on the statutory plate. The TÜV can, and often do, check that this is the case when the vehicle is submitted for test.

I used to be a Vehicle Examiner and now I'm a Lifting Equipment Examiner, I've seen TUV in action and they aren't all they're cracked up to be, in fact the last time I saw one of their 'experts' examine a gantry crane I was shocked (no high-vis, no electrical continuity or insulation tests, no load test), Germans tend to think that 1: TUV is a government agency - they aren't and 2: They're 'experts' - not in my experience they aren't.

[fred]

I agree with Lutz, there is a difference between custom and practise and what actually is the law.  

Edited December 1, 2017 by fred

[Lutz]

45 minutes ago, Borussia 1900 said:

I used to be a Vehicle Examiner and now I'm a Lifting Equipment Examiner, I've seen TUV in action and they aren't all they're cracked up to be, in fact the last time I saw one of their 'experts' examine a gantry crane I was shocked (no high-vis, no electrical continuity or insulation tests, no load test), Germans tend to think that 1: TUV is a government agency - they aren't and 2: They're 'experts' - not in my experience they aren't.

True, but as in all walks of life it's a matter of how fastidious the examiner is. We all know that some test centres, whether TÜV, DEKRA or anyone else, are more painstaking than others. I know of several cases of where technical modifications to a vehicle have been made and the owner has deliberately selected a test centre that is more sympathetic to the matter.

Still, whether expert or not, the examiner is ultimately accountable for what he has done and that does take some of the responsibility off the shoulders of the vehicle owner.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Lutz

[Stevan]

23 minutes ago, fred said:

I agree with Lutz, there is a difference between custom and practise and what actually is the law.  

If the law and regulations are taken to the letter, bearing in mind the various regulatory bodies it frequently ties itself in knots. This is how clever (and for that you can read expensive) members of the legal profession make their money and why so many convictions get overturned if pushed far enough through the legal system.  

[fred]

2 minutes ago, Stevan said:

If the law and regulations are taken to the letter, bearing in mind the various regulatory bodies it frequently ties itself in knots. This is how clever (and for that you can read expensive) members of the legal profession make their money and why so many convictions get overturned if pushed far enough through the legal system.  

The point is.  I want to know what regulation?  I don’t want an anti Politician or Lawyer rant, just I am interested in exactly what legistration is being applied.  I am neither a Lawyer or an Engineer, but I have faced a couple of situations, where “we don’t do that” when questioned has no legal basis, sometimes assumption are made, which aren’t in reality aren’t underpinned by any real regulation.  

[Steamdrivenandy]

2 hours ago, Lutz said:

It's still an independent body, though, even though their membership includes some if not all manufacturers. Dealers, distributors, suppliers and even campsite organisations are also represented in their membership.

Perhaps they should stick to representing trade interests, which is their main purpose,  rather than assuming powers of a bogus legislative authority.

Contrary to the information often stated on CT, neither the CC (CMC) or C&CC are members of the NCC. I have had that confirmed by an NCC staff member and the list of member businesses on the NCC website. The membership consists of all the major UK caravan and motorhome manufacturers some smaller ones, some Continental ones and lots of parts manufacturers.  

[svimes]

1 hour ago, Durbanite said:

For a successful prosecution the police would probably use the load rating on the tyres or the mandatory plate on the trailer chassis.   Load rating on the tyres is a hard one to fight as you are then probably breaking more than one law so if the one does not stick the other will.

However it is always good practice to stay within the manufacturer's MTPLM guidelines.

My van has load index 102 (850kg) tyres, I believe you can readily get indexes of up to 104 (900kg).

1700 - 1800kg (based on load index) is a healthy 250 - 350 kg above the MTPLM of the van!

[Stevan]

52 minutes ago, fred said:

The point is.  I want to know what regulation?  I don’t want an anti Politician or Lawyer rant, just I am interested in exactly what legistration is being applied.  I am neither a Lawyer or an Engineer, but I have faced a couple of situations, where “we don’t do that” when questioned has no legal basis, sometimes assumption are made, which aren’t in reality aren’t underpinned by any real regulation.  

Sounds like you want a simple black or white answer! In the real world most things just don't happen like that. If it were possible to point to a single regulation or law that precisely covered this specific point this thread would be much shorter.

The vast majority of law is full of ifs, buts and exceptions, with large gaps between.

[Lutz]

12 minutes ago, Steamdrivenandy said:

Contrary to the information often stated on CT, neither the CC (CMC) or C&CC are members of the NCC. I have had that confirmed by an NCC staff member and the list of member businesses on the NCC website. The membership consists of all the major UK caravan and motorhome manufacturers some smaller ones, some Continental ones and lots of parts manufacturers.   

. ... and lots of operators of caravan and holiday parks - probably more than all the manufacturers put together.

[fred]

15 minutes ago, Stevan said:

Sounds like you want a simple black or white answer! In the real world most things just don't happen like that. If it were possible to point to a single regulation or law that precisely covered this specific point this thread would be much shorter.

The vast majority of law is full of ifs, buts and exceptions, with large gaps between.

In the regulated industry I work in there is a famous quote.  

“If it’s not written down, it is only a rumour”

No if buts or maybe’s. If it is true there will be a regulation that states that a plate on a caravan can take precedence over the statutory plate that is mandated by regulation.  Without that regulation what you are saying it is OK to make up laws as we go along and prosecute people on that basis.   For all I know such a regulation does exist, if it does exist then the enforcement agency’s should be be able to quote it and reference it.  Otherwise it remains merely a rumour.  

[Steamdrivenandy]

2 minutes ago, fred said:

In the regulated industry I work in there is a famous quote.  

“If it’s not written down, it is only a rumour”

No if buts or maybe’s. If it is true there will be a regulation that states that a plate on a caravan can take precedence over the statutory plate that is mandated by regulation.  Without that regulation what you are saying it is OK to make up laws as we go along and prosecute people on that basis.   For all I know such a regulation does exist, if it does exist then the enforcement agency’s should be be able to quote it and reference it.  Otherwise it remains merely a rumour.  

This all sort of reinforces my theory that you'd have to really blatantly overload your caravan AND refuse to reduce the load before you ever faced the possibility of prosecution. If it's at all marginal and you co-operate it seems to me that any enforcement officer would be loathe to press charges etc because the legal position could be argued as unclear.