C1 Driving Licence - Again

[Brian Kirby]

colin - 2011-02-15 7:35 PM

Vernon B - 2011-02-15 12:16 PM Derek do you happen to know why the very sensible suggestion by the French for a CC category was "apparently" rejected? V

Why would it be sensible to have a sepperate weight catagory for motorhomes? All the MH's I can think of are commercial vehicles with a whole load of weight permanently fitted in the back and I see no reason why they should be considered different to the base vehicle.

I think it may be sensible, but I don't expect it to happen.  The present band in C1 is 3.5 - 7.5 tonnes.  It seems the authorities are uneasy about this banding, which is presumably why they have made the test for C1 so relatively stringent, requiring a test vehicle of 5+ metres long, 4.0+ tonnes weight, with tachograph, with additional rear view mirror for instructor, and for the unqualified driver to be accompanied only by a driver who has passed the C1 test.  That, as stated in the MMM article, carries a bill of around £1,000 to gain the C1 license.  That cost will bear heavily on some (inevitably not all) who may wish to drive vehicles in that category. 

There has been a long string on inadequate payloads.  The main reason for this is larger, and heavier vans.  The solution to that is to buy smaller vans, which many do not wish to do, build cleverer, lighter vans, of which a number of manufacturers seem incapable, or to fully formalise the odd legal place already occupied by motor caravans.  Legally, they are cars, not commercial vehicles, despite their underpinnings, so do not have to have tachographs.  Despite their general weight and bulk, the majority can be driven on car licenses, by anyone who passed a car test before 1/1/97, even those weighing up to 7.5 tonnes.

I pretty soon noticed, and was quite surprised by, differences between the way a 3.5 tonne van behaves on the road, and the way a car behaves.  Extend that to 7.5 tonnes, and I can easily see why there is reluctance to allow such vehicles to be driven without further testing. 

However, few motor caravans are as heavy as 7.5 tonnes: most, it seems to me, having MAMs of less than 5 tonnes.  So, if motor caravans were given their own vehicle group, with the B license allowing cars or motor caravans up to 3.5 tonnes to be driven, as at present, but with a restricted C1 license being required to drive motor caravans only, of up to 5 tonnes (perhaps with the B license having to have been held for three years), it would simplify the test requirements. 

The test vehicle could then reasonably be a motor caravan weighing between 3.5 tonnes and 5 tonnes, with any existing holder of a C1 license permitted to accompany the unqualified driver, recognising that motor caravaning is a leisure, and not a commercial, driving pursuit.

The benefit of creating a "motor caravan" category is that it would then be clear which vehicles the license actually covered, i.e motor caravans, and not commercial vehicles.  But, as I said above, I very much doubt if such a measure would ever be introduced, unless the whole European industry, and the motorhoming press, plus motorhomers, all lobbied energetically to that end.  Even then, it seems rather improbable.

In the end, it will probably be cheaper for manufacturers and sellers of heavier vans to include the cost of the C1 license in the price of their vans, and to organise the additional driver training on a no pass, no buy, basis.

[Vernon B]

eljay - 2011-02-15 7:59 PM

 

Derek,

 

Being a member of a French club I am aware of a number of members who have taken advantage of this law change and up-sized their camping cars, including one with a tag-axle Hymer, and another who is definitely over 70 years of age.

 

J

 

Hi Eljay I don't understand what you mean by "members have taken advantage of this law change" to upsize their 'vans as on the face of it the pressure is to down size. It would certainly be very interesting to know more about how this legislation is being adopted (or should that be "adapted") over there.

 

V

[Vernon B]

Brian Kirby - 2011-02-16 12:16 AMThere has been a long string on inadequate payloads.  The main reason for this is larger, and heavier vans.  The solution to that is to buy smaller vans, which many do not wish to do, build cleverer, lighter vans, of which a number of manufacturers seem incapable, or to fully formalise the odd legal place already occupied by motor caravans.  Legally, they are cars, not commercial vehicles, despite their underpinnings, so do not have to have tachographs.  Despite their general weight and bulk, the majority can be driven on car licenses, by anyone who passed a car test before 1/1/97, even those weighing up to 7.5 tonnes.

I pretty soon noticed, and was quite surprised by, differences between the way a 3.5 tonne van behaves on the road, and the way a car behaves.  Extend that to 7.5 tonnes, and I can easily see why there is reluctance to allow such vehicles to be driven without further testing.  .

Sorry to edit this quote Brian, and run the risk of placing it out of context, but I'd like to focus on these particular points.Firstly, on the point of manufacturers building lighter 'vans. Several posts have stated or implied that continental - particularly French - manufacturers have taken that approach and thereby overcome the payload constraints imposed by the 3.5t limit, unlike their UK counterparts. I wonder if that is true. Interestingly in the same edition of MMM that started this thread there is a feature on a 2007 Pilote 730 written by a generally satisfied owner. Here's one of his quotes:-"With such a vast amount of storage it would be easy to overload the 'van especially as the gross vehicle weight is 3,500kg. The Pilote brochure quoted payload as N/A, so I suspect it's minimal."Now as it happened we owned a Pilote A Class until quite recently, a 2003 Galaxy 270. This was a 6m 'van compared with the writer's 7.3m. It had a lighter Alko chassis but on the other hand it had heavier double floor. Our 'van had a payload of 550kg but a MAM of 3850kg. I found the 550kg more than adequate but could not have managed without that extra 350kg.Now there’s a four year development gap between our ‘van and the writers. His layout and exterior styling is quite different to ours but the interior fittings appear to be of a similar if not identical construction – Pilote’s well respected “heavy furniture”. So from this “sample” of one, there’s no evidence that continental manufacturers are using clever ways to take weight out of their vehicles. Or perhaps they’ve tried and failed. What is clear is that what was put on the market as a 3.5t ‘van should more sensibly be upgraded, legitimately, to a 3.85t MAM.And of course the option of upgrading to 3.85t is always the reaction when buyers raise the issue of too little payload. Pilote and the French are not alone in this – you only have to look at the Hymer range. The thing is of course that the “upgrade solution” now has a shelf life – unless you’re willing to take the route of getting a C1 licence all for an extra 350kg.Your second point about the different road behaviour of a 3.5t ‘van compared with a car is particularly interesting. On the face of it no one would argue with your observation but it is somewhat a reflection of the mind-set we have as ‘van owners. Had we been having a similar debate about what qualifications should be required to drive other vehicles, like motorcars or motorcycles, it would be “speed”, “acceleration” and “bhp” that would be the focus of attention. Vehicle “weight” wouldn’t enter the debate yet it is the primary determinant of a car licence. If we had that debate we might question why someone passing their driving test in a Smart Car would also be qualified to drive a 250mph McLaren MP4-12C. What we’d overlooked completely is that it is the insurance companies that do the risk analysis on an individual basis and a price has to be paid when you step up a gear. And in that regard, can anyone show me the data that demonstrates that 3.5tplus motorhomes (not HGVs) are less safe than sub 3.5t motorhomes?Moreover we may, unwittingly, have fallen into another trap in assuming these EU licence regulations were to do with safety considerations at all! Derek’s posts mention that the French authorities were adopting them way back in the 1970s. If that is case I suspect that they may have been primarily concerned with the “Harmonisation” of commercial practices across “The Common Market”. After all neither “Elf & Safety” nor “Carbon Emissions” had been invented in those days.And if I’m right it might explain why the chap from Brownhills on p41 of MMM said “However, the growth in motorhome sales may be derailed BY A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO IMPACT THE LEISURE VEHICLE SECTOR” (my caps). Was this a casual remark or does he know something we don’t?If so it just might explain why we're in this fine mess again Stanley!

[Brian Kirby]

Vernon B - 2011-02-16 8:00 PM ................. Moreover we may, unwittingly, have fallen into another trap in assuming these EU licence regulations were to do with safety considerations at all! Derek’s posts mention that the French authorities were adopting them way back in the 1970s. ................... And if I’m right it might explain why the chap from Brownhills on p41 of MMM said “However, the growth in motorhome sales may be derailed BY A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO IMPACT THE LEISURE VEHICLE SECTOR” (my caps). Was this a casual remark or does he know something we don’t? If so it just might explain why we're in this fine mess again Stanley!

Afraid I've edited yours also, in the interests of brevity.  On payloads, I'm not sure whether it is possible to say this, or that, nation builds lighter.  The variations are much more, it seems to me, between manufacturers.  I assume each sticks to his last, most continuing to build in the manner they have evolved, and for which they are best known.  Conservatism, I suspect, is what limits change, rather than genetics.  :-)

On the first part above, I think you may have misunderstood Derek's point.  The French law that changed in '75 was always rigidly applied by the authorities on the basis that if anyone wanted to drive anything heavier than 3,500kg, irrespective of when they passed their test, they had to take the "Poids lourd" (HGV) test in full.  In the meantime, the French widely adopted vans in the 7 - 7.5 metre length range, with fixed rear beds, resulting in many cases in vans with "joke" payloads.  The French authorities were aware of this and, a few years back, began carrying out roadside weight checks on motorhomes, with predictable results.  Part of the outcome, as I understand it, was some very effective lobbying by the FFACCC (Federation Francaise des Associations et Clubs de Camping-Cars), requesting the government to look again at the question of "grandfather rights" - informed, I think at least in part, by knowledge of the concession gained by British drivers.  The result was that on examination it was found the new legislation had in fact never addressed those rights, and that holders of pre 1977 licenses did, indeed, retain the right to drive pretty much anything on wheels.  (The FFACCC is quite a formidable body, is well organised, is well connected, is pretty ruthless in promoting the interests of motorhomers in France, and has much of the credit for the widespread availability of aires in France.  Several things that we British motorhomers have yet to achieve!  :-))  So, I think the answer, as so often, has more to do with the cock-up, rather than the conspiracy, theory of history!  :-)

As to what yer man in BH knew, I think he was probably referring to the fact that the changes in driving license categories were introduced without reference to, or consideration of, motorhomes and their users.  I think the European legislators had their eye much more on the wide variations in licensing requirements from country to country within the EC, and on the increasing numbers of trucks that (quite legally) were crossing internal borders in the hands of drivers who lacked the knowledge or experience required to do so in safety.  So yes, I am sure harmonisation of testing and licensing standards was the prime mover, but I would see that as driven by a logical and reasonable desire for improved road safety, rather than as an end in itself.

[Patricia]

brubell - 2011-02-15 12:16 AM

 

Hii All.. this article did give me food for thought.. I have been planning to buy a car trailer suitable for a small car. to take with us when we over winter in somewhere much further south..however... since the dreaded 3 score and ten is rapidly approaching.. I am now wondering if my ( hopefully extented for another 3 years) licence will permit me to tow a braked trailer with a MAM of over 750 kilos... I passed my test in the very early 60's and I still have a paper licence showing that I am permitted to drive groups 'A' 'D' and 'E'............. no mention anywhere of C1...... currently own a M/home with MAM of 3,500 kilos... so I have no need to be driving a heavier vehicle.. just the question of whether I can TOW a heavy trailer... does anyone have any ideas?.. I have searched the gov and dvla web sites but cannot find the answer to that one anywhere.. ( I have however e-mailed the dvla.. and I am waiting for their reply.. I am glad that this article was there for me to read this month because without it I might happily have gone a spent loads of dosh on a nice sparkling new trailer.... I would not have been a happy bunny if withing 6 months I could not use it..

 

I, too, passed my test in 1960 but for some reason my licence was changed in 1976 (according to my current licence although I have absolutely no idea why) to yet another paper one. As I am in France at the moment I do not have access to my personal papers so I cannot check it but, when I reached the age of 70, I decided not to try to retain my "grandfather's" (or should that be "grandmother's"!) rights as I am diabetic and it seemed to be too much fuss. However, I do have a small car that I could tow if I so wished, and like you I contacted the DVLA. I have a letter from them assuring me that I can legally drive a motorhome up to 3500 kgs and tow any trailer weight as long as it does not exceed the towing restrictions of the motorhome.

 

PS I was tempted to change my licence for a French one as I was informed that the French retain their driving licence groups for life - however, I have never bothered to check whether that is correct. I think farmers lose their right to drive tractors when they retire and have to apply to the authorities to regain it. So possibly lots of differences across Europe? I am sure I read somewhere that the EU is keen to make everyone retake their tests every few years anyway.

[Vernon B]

 

Thanks for the history lesson Brian it helps fill in some of the gaps for me.

 

It will be interesting to see how all this develops; for instances whether any of your ideas are taken up like concessions on the content/format of the C1 test for motorhome drivers or dealers offering fast track training as part of the sales package.

 

As far as how construction methods might evolve I had to take a second look at the brief review of the Burstner Ixeo Time it585, MMMs Award Winner. Can this 5.99mm 2/4 berth low profile 'van with a MAM of 3,300kg and a drop-down bed really come with a 710kg? Could be problem solved for me in three years time when I reach 70.

 

V

 

 

 

 

[Derek Uzzell]

Just for the record, although there is still an EU "C1" driving-licence category, I believe France no longer chooses to make use of it. Consequently, passing the French test that permits a vehicle over 3500kg MAM to be driven gives one the full-blown "C" entitlement.

 

 

[Richard Clark]

This debate has developed into a fascinating, but perhaps unnecessary dialogue seemingly because Steve Cullen from Brownhills is quoted as suggesting that the pre 1997 tested drivers" no longer have an automatic right to drive vehicles up to 7.5 tonnes"

I would like to know whether he is suggesting there has been a change in the Regulations or whether there has never been an "automatic" right.

Perhaps someone from MMM might wish to research this.

If there really has been a change in the Regs. we should be made aware,.there being significant implications to us as drivers, but also as owners whose precious van might be significantly devalued should they be in the "over 3.5 tonnes" category

Hopefully it`s all a storm in a teacup and Mr Cullen simply has a youthful sales force who have to take the "big" test

[Robinhood]

Richard Clark - 2011-02-18 4:11 PM

 

This debate has developed into a fascinating, but perhaps unnecessary dialogue seemingly because Steve Cullen from Brownhills is quoted as suggesting that the pre 1997 tested drivers" no longer have an automatic right to drive vehicles up to 7.5 tonnes"

I would like to know whether he is suggesting there has been a change in the Regulations or whether there has never been an "automatic" right.

Perhaps someone from MMM might wish to research this.

If there really has been a change in the Regs. we should be made aware,.there being significant implications to us as drivers, but also as owners whose precious van might be significantly devalued should they be in the "over 3.5 tonnes" category

Hopefully it`s all a storm in a teacup and Mr Cullen simply has a youthful sales force who have to take the "big" test

 

I think you've either misread the article or been misinformed. :-S His statement was about post-1997 drivers, and is aimed at highlighting the dwindling pool of drivers who can legally use a motorhome above 3500kg, without the not-insignificant expense of a further test.

[Vernon B]

 

Hi Richard

 

As I'm responsible for this "unnecessary dialogue" perhaps I should clarify the situation and divert the flack from the good Mr Cullen.

 

No one has suggested that there has been any change in the status of pre 1997 tested drivers. This thread is about the hoops that post 1997 tested drivers will have to go through if they wish to drive motorhomes heavier than 3.5t. Unfortunately for Mr Cullen I made reference to his general concerns about more of these people entering the market but the article that prompted my post was the experience of a member of the public having to take a full blown HGV test with all the trimmings.

 

Please don't start another hare running or you'll get the good Mr Newell after you.

 

V

[Mike B.]

I've got: A B BE C1 C1E D1 D1E fklnp & M on my licence.

Does this mean I can drive a Double decker Trolley bus converted to a motorhome towing a smartcar on an A frame and a motorcycle on a trailer ................as long as I stay out of the 3rd lane on a motorway?

Or does it jus mean I may be able to get a job in Blackpool this summer? *-) :-)

[flicka]

I think it WILL impact on all of us indirectly.

The Dealers recruit new sales & service staff and in many cases will have to put them through the C1 class test.

 

I'll leave you all to ponder where those not insignificant COSTS will be recouped from.

[Brian Kirby]

Brian Kirby - 2011-02-14 6:49 PM

....................I assume there must be widespread lobbying all across Europe on this issue, not just from motorhome manufacturers, but also from manufacturers of LCV derivatives that exceed MAM 3.5 tonnes, but fall below MAM 5.0 tonnes.  Perhaps the European motorhoming press should begin to raise the profile of this issue in conjunction with all affected manufacturers to gain the necessary, and fairly minor, modifications that would allow motorhomes and larger panel vans and their derivatives, to be driven without having to leap such onerous licensing hurdles.......................

Just an update on the above, it now seems the French are on the case.  There is a new EC Directive (Directive 2006/126/CE) on driving licences, that will come into force on 19 January 2013, which is intended to standardise driving licence categories across the EU, the ages at which they may be gained, and also the periods of licence validity.

Full text of 2006/126/CE here: http://tinyurl.com/63f7osh  ref 32006L0126.

Among other things, this introduces across Europe the "C1" category that we have had in UK for some years, for vehicles over 3.5 tonnes MAM and up to 7.5 tonnes MAM. 

This has not, hitherto, been the case in France (and no doubt elsewhere as well!), where drivers went straight from a "B" (car) licence to a "C" (HGV) licence. 

French holders of "B" licences gained before 20 January 1975 have only recently (15 July 2009) been told they hold, by default, the "C" category, meaning they can drive pretty much anything except buses.  The French authorities having hitherto - by accident or design - insisted that the HGV test had to be passed by everyone wishing to drive vehicles over 3.5 tonnes MAM, irrespective of when they passed their "B" test.

Having looked at the new test requirements for gaining the "C1" licence (which appear broadly similar to those currently required in UK for this category), it seems the French are now pressing for a re-think, to allow a "lighter" test and medical examination specifically for those wishing to drive motorhomes of over 3.5 tonnes MAM.  So, it seems we are not alone!  :-)

[Vernon B]

Promising development Brian. All we need now is for the French to lobby for the standardisation of gas cylinders across Europe and the EU might have some point after all.

 

V