Motorhome weights - VOSA Technical Officer's view

[Ocsid]

Brock - 2017-04-07 11:08 PM

 

A number of vehicles' tyres were also over the five year recommendation "

 

Which is worrying as the tyre retail industry [as this German example] classifies a tyre as "new" if up to 5 years old when sold, and "brand new" if up to 3 years old. Buying a new tyre yesterday and stopped today by VOSA and booked for it being too old!

 

http://www.mytyres.co.uk/FAQs/Questions_about_our_products_Tyres_Questions_about_tyre_age.html

 

I though the current view was that at 5 years old you should make a point of inspecting them for external aging damage, and look to replace them at 7 years old.

 

Unless its a public carrying coach then it seemed from an incident a few years back using a 19 year old tyre broke no laws.

[aandy]

david lloyd - 2017-04-07 2:47 PM

 

It has been suggested that the 5% leeway is to accomodate differences in the accuracy of individual weighbridges - which may well be true - but the VOSA weighbridges, I would have thought, will be calibrated to a finite tolerance in all likelihood. So, VOSA staff would have no need to rely on the inaccuracies of third party weighbridges or make any special provisions and are, as Alan has indicated in his first hand account above, more likely to just process anyone over the plated limits of their vehicle regardless of whether the individual has or has not had it weighed elsewhere.

 

David

 

I worked for VOSA some years ago, and part of my job was weighing vehicles. At that time (20+ years ago) up to 5% was a verbal warning and the vehicle was allowed to proceed without removing the overload; 5%-10% the vehicle was prohibited from leaving the site until within its plated weights; over 10% the driver was reported for prosecution. While that may have changed, I doubt that it has in respect of the 5% tolerance. Whatever the tolerance of VOSA's own weighbridges (I believe it was the same as for any public weighbridge, but I could be wrong) part of the rationale for the 5% was to avoid the situation whereby a driver had weighed the vehicle at the start of the journey and had fallen foul of differences between the two bridges. In that sense, VOSA do (or did) take account of possible inaccuracies in third party weighbridges.

 

It is also worth noting that, unless things have changed, the police and trading standards carry out their own checks, independent of VOSA, and may well apply different criteria.

 

While it is unlikely to be of any practical use to anyone on here (unless stopped within a few miles of setting out) you cannot be prosecuted for overloading if you are on route to the nearest weighbridge to the place where the vehicle was loaded.

 

[derek pringle]

aandy - 2017-04-08 8:59 AM

 

david lloyd - 2017-04-07 2:47 PM

 

It has been suggested that the 5% leeway is to accomodate differences in the accuracy of individual weighbridges - which may well be true - but the VOSA weighbridges, I would have thought, will be calibrated to a finite tolerance in all likelihood. So, VOSA staff would have no need to rely on the inaccuracies of third party weighbridges or make any special provisions and are, as Alan has indicated in his first hand account above, more likely to just process anyone over the plated limits of their vehicle regardless of whether the individual has or has not had it weighed elsewhere.

 

David

 

I worked for VOSA some years ago, and part of my job was weighing vehicles. At that time (20+ years ago) up to 5% was a verbal warning and the vehicle was allowed to proceed without removing the overload; 5%-10% the vehicle was prohibited from leaving the site until within its plated weights; over 10% the driver was reported for prosecution. While that may have changed, I doubt that it has in respect of the 5% tolerance. Whatever the tolerance of VOSA's own weighbridges (I believe it was the same as for any public weighbridge, but I could be wrong) part of the rationale for the 5% was to avoid the situation whereby a driver had weighed the vehicle at the start of the journey and had fallen foul of differences between the two bridges. In that sense, VOSA do (or did) take account of possible inaccuracies in third party weighbridges.

 

It is also worth noting that, unless things have changed, the police and trading standards carry out their own checks, independent of VOSA, and may well apply different criteria.

 

While it is unlikely to be of any practical use to anyone on here (unless stopped within a few miles of setting out) you cannot be prosecuted for overloading if you are on route to the nearest weighbridge to the place where the vehicle was loaded.

 

Hi,

I find this both interesting and disturbing as it seems fair enough for VOSA officers who check a motorhome and find it slightly overweight yet letting it go on its way with a warning,but if this system IS the same for all vehicles then 5% overweight on a massive lorry is equal to more than the weight of an OVERLOADED m/h extra. What a dangerous thought as I believe a great many m/homes regularly travel overweight. Hop the jugganauts dont.

cheers

derek

[Brock]

Belated thanks to mgnbuk for spotting the article.

 

Practical Caravan recommend changing CARAVAN tyres after 5 years. Commercial vehicles are subject to stricter rules than motorhomes.

 

Reich make a weighing plate which they claim is within 3% accuracy providing it is recalibrated every two years. It only weighs 'one wheel' at a time but adds up the figures. The 1500Kg per wheel plate is about £250 or less.

 

http://reich-web.com/en/products/vehicle-accessories/cwc-caravan-weight-control-up-to-1500-kg/

 

VOSA's annual report for 2014/5 says that it achieved an overall prohibition rate of 26.6% [targeted] compared to12.5% [random]. It would be inappropriate to extrapolate the targeted caravan/trailer failure rate to random motorcaravans.

[david lloyd]

aandy - 2017-04-08 8:59 AM

 

david lloyd - 2017-04-07 2:47 PM

 

It has been suggested that the 5% leeway is to accomodate differences in the accuracy of individual weighbridges - which may well be true - but the VOSA weighbridges, I would have thought, will be calibrated to a finite tolerance in all likelihood. So, VOSA staff would have no need to rely on the inaccuracies of third party weighbridges or make any special provisions and are, as Alan has indicated in his first hand account above, more likely to just process anyone over the plated limits of their vehicle regardless of whether the individual has or has not had it weighed elsewhere.

 

David

 

I worked for VOSA some years ago, and part of my job was weighing vehicles. At that time (20+ years ago) up to 5% was a verbal warning and the vehicle was allowed to proceed without removing the overload; 5%-10% the vehicle was prohibited from leaving the site until within its plated weights; over 10% the driver was reported for prosecution. While that may have changed, I doubt that it has in respect of the 5% tolerance. Whatever the tolerance of VOSA's own weighbridges (I believe it was the same as for any public weighbridge, but I could be wrong) part of the rationale for the 5% was to avoid the situation whereby a driver had weighed the vehicle at the start of the journey and had fallen foul of differences between the two bridges. In that sense, VOSA do (or did) take account of possible inaccuracies in third party weighbridges.

 

It is also worth noting that, unless things have changed, the police and trading standards carry out their own checks, independent of VOSA, and may well apply different criteria.

 

While it is unlikely to be of any practical use to anyone on here (unless stopped within a few miles of setting out) you cannot be prosecuted for overloading if you are on route to the nearest weighbridge to the place where the vehicle was loaded.

 

Hi aandy and thank you for your insight into VOSA operating procedures. As you say, it was 20+ years ago and procedures may have changed in that time. The technology employed most likely has. However, as Alan from aandncaravans has pointed out from his personal experience recently, there are certainly some VOSA checkpoints that most certainly will not accept a 5% overload and will insist on the weight being redistributed (in the case of individual axle overload) or excess weight being removed. Again, as you say, the more extreme the overload the higher the penalties rise.

 

Although I can accept what is said about VOSA officers taking into account the differences in accuracy of third party weighbridges I would have thought that would only be acceptable if the offending vehicle has a recent weighbridge certificate proving it has been weighed before that journey and, on that particular weighbridge, was found to be within the plated limits. Stopping a 3500kg motorhome that weighs 3675kg and has never been weighed may indicate to the officer that the driver has no regard for exceeding the payload limit.

 

What is really frightening isn't the +\- 5% but that many motorhomers I have met over the years have absolutely no idea that there is any form of weight limit on their vehicle (let alone what that might be or if they are exceeding it) and others who definitely do know and deliberately exceed the limits. Perhaps it's about time technology was put to good use and automatic axle weight indicators fitted to vans, lorries, Motorhomes etc. Then there would be no excuse for overloading and no reason for any '% tolerance allowance'.

 

David

[Guest pelmetman]

I went on a weigh bridge once 8-) ........I now have a trailer :D .......

 

 

[aandy]

Derek, the 5% was subject to the vehicle not exceeding any of the plated weights by more than one ton, in which case it would have been prohibited until compliant. In practice the heavier vehicles could not always take advantage of the full 'allowance'. I didn't mention that initially as it is (I hope) irrelevant in terms of the extent to which a motorhome might be overloaded. Personally, I was never convinced of the case for the overriding limit since, whatever the size of the vehicle, tyres, brakes etc will still only be operating within the same percentage margin. A 40 ton lorry with a 2 ton overload shouldn't be compromised any more than a 3.5 ton van with 175 over.

 

David, not all weighbridges available to commercial drivers issue certificates. In Dover for example, there is a 'drive-over' facility available to all lorries passing through the port, which simply shows the weights on a display as the vehicle passes over it. Also, you have to remember that VOSA's own weighbridges are not 100% accurate. As far as I can remember, the tolerance was 50kg for a static plate and 150kg for a dynamic (where each axle is weighed individually as the vehicle drives across).