APPENDIX 10
Memorandum submitted by Eurosun Coaches
The purpose of writing this brief report is
to help the House of Commons Transport Select Committee with their
assessment of the effectiveness of VOSA.
We are a coach operator who has been running
for 10 years. We run 15 coaches on a variety of work including
work and school contracts, national and international tours etc.
We have had a few issues through these 10 years with VOSA, some
of the issues dealt with effectively and some not as well. For
the purpose of this report I will mainly deal with the testing
and enforcement side of VOSA.
I have tried to write this report with reference
to personal examples, without prejudice.
VOSA states that the aim of the VOSA agency
is to contribute to the improvement of the road safety and environmental
standards, and to the reduction of vehicle crime. One of the biggest
and most serious problems we have had with VOSA is (we feel) the
lack of VOSA's duty to the general public in promoting road safety.
We have had many examples of this where all the VI inspector wants
is to catch the operator, and not the driver, and not always looking
to promote road safety.
We had one driver who drove four hours to Heathrow
airport to drop a group of passengers off, and drove four hours
home (coach was empty), and this was without a break. So this
driver drove for eight hours without the minimum 45 minute statutory
break. A local VI Officer from Norwich came to our office for
another reason, and I showed him this tachograph, and asked him
what we should do about it. He said it was nothing to worry about.
The driver in question finished working for us the following week,
but when I confronted him about this tachochart and said I was
going to report him to VOSA, he just laughed, and said he wasn't
worried about it. With drivers such as this out there, it makes
a mockery of the transport system. Drivers will make mistakes
(they are only human), but a blatant disregard of the laws by
drivers such as this, and the "slap-happy, careless"
approach from VOSA is jeopardising the transport system , and
not promoting road safety like they should. VOSA has a duty of
care to protect the general public, and we feel they are falling
short of this.
We had another case of a driver starting his
working day three hours early (driver needed nine hours off, and
only had six hours off) driving home from Euro Disney, this meant
the driver was hours over his spread over driving hours, and again
VOSA did nothing about it, and said "just store it with the
others" when we asked advice about what to do about it. Once
a driver has left our depot we have no control over when he will
take his breaks, which route he will take, what speed he will
drive. It is drivers such as this which causes the accidents on
the road. If VOSA completed their jobs more effectively and that
drivers are afraid of breaking the law, this will cause these
drivers to drive at the correct speeds, and take their correct
breaks and keep to the laws laid down in the Transport Act, but
at the moment the drivers have no respect for VOSA, and VOSA aren't
trying hard enough to promote road safety by prosecuting these
drivers, who are the root cause of the problem.
I have in the past spoken to local coach and
haulage operators, as well as discussing certain problems with
our trade associates such as the CPT and the FTA. The reason we
got told for VOSA's lack of action to prosecute drivers was the
VI examiners points system they are awarded. They get very few
points for a driver prosecution, but for a operator they get a
lot of points. For this reason they seem to focus their attentions
on the operators, instead of the common cause of the problems,
the drivers. VOSA seems to have lost its goal in promoting road
safety and all the inspectors worry about is how many points they
can collect in the easiest way. This is endangering the public's
lives, and before I heard of this Commons inquiry I was going
to bring this matter up with our local MP, because we feel so
strongly about the government agencies (VOSA's) apparent lack
of care to the general public.
We have also had problems with VOSA performance.
We have had two prohibitions issued incorrectly and have been
removed immediately. We have had vehicle checks at places such
as Alton Towers were the VI inspectors have given our driver the
wrong paperwork, and it's for a completely different vehicle and
operating licence number. We are all human, but who is VOSA accountable
too?
We have complained about our local VI Enforcement
officer (from Norwich), because one of the drivers reversed a
coach into his mother's car, and ever since then it seemed that
he treated us harshly, and had a grudge against the company. We
asked if we could have a different officer, but this never materialised,
so still have him breathing down our necks. Sometimes VOSA acts
as the British Mafia (pardon the phrase). We had a new vehicle
inspection officer to check the vehicles, and he came down to
introduce himself to us. Suddenly there were six VI examiners
(to check only about six coaches) and were down all day to check
the vehicles. The inspector at the end of the fleet inspection
apologised for the heavy handed approach from VOSA. But VOSA are
a law unto themselves. They come in heavy handed, and no operator
likes to complain about them because they are worried about being
victimised in the future, and not treated fairly. A lot of local
operators have stated that they wish they could appeal against
certain problems, but are afraid to because of the future consequences
of this.
Drivers are human, and vehicles are mechanical,
and VOSA should take this into account. A coach coming home from
a nine day school ski tour will be filthy by the time it gets
back into the UK. But if the children have made a mess of the
coach and have chewing gum all over the racks and sandwiches and
crisps and sweets everywhere, it is not fair to issue a prohibition.
We had a coach pass its MOT and the next day had a road-side ministry
check were two of the children were fighting and broke one of
the seats. The VI examiner put an immediate prohibition on the
coach (there were enough spare seats to not use the broken one),
then though the teachers explained what had happened, they still
issued the prohibition. Same will happen if a bulb or fuse blows,
prohibition is immediately issued. All we expect is for sometimes
for the VI examiner to act reasonably and fairly and apply some
common sense. But due to this points system that the examiners
are rewarded, they will issue as many prohibitions as they can
in order to reach their quota, and not always act in the fairest
way possible.
We also have been told that if the examiner
finds no faults with a coach they won't issue a blank "No
defects found" form, because this will not look good on their
record, as they have to issue so many prohibitions. This is wrong
as it looks bad on a operator's record if only the prohibitions
issued are recorded, and not the actual number of vehicles checked.
We have been witness to this procedure many times, and has happened
in Norfolk as well as Essex and Devon and the Midland Areas, where
our coaches have been checked but no faults found, so no records
produced. This problem needs to be addressed, as the prohibition
rate is a very important factor in analysing rogue operators.
Without all this information, it is difficult to paint a complete
picture of the operator's business and performance, and compliance
to the regulations.
We have had brand new tyres on a coach, and
picked up a stone on its way to the ministry station (which is
15 miles) and had the coach fail its MOT for this. They can see
it's a brand new tyre with all the stickers still on the outside,
but failed it, and needed a retest etc, which all cause problems.
On the testing standards part of VOSA we had a vehicle fail its
smoke test four times at Norwich, but at a designated VI garage
it passed easily every time, and had the same problem with headlight
adjustments, but when we complained we basically got told "tough".
We have had one coach which is 15 years old, and got told it needed
an interlock. We explained that it doesn't need one, and they
can see it was never fitted with one, and gone through 14 MOT
tests before. We spend hours on the phone with Swansea technical,
and still Norwich testing station won't believe us. In the end
Swansea PSV technical had to ring Norwich testing station in order
to solve the problem. VOSA aren't reasonable, and feel their decision
is final. I have many more problems with testing standards, but
most to do with the vehicle examiners lack of training and lack
of common sense and understanding, and not trying to help the
operator at all. We have had in the past few months had our vehicles
tested before the annual MOT test by the FTA and still had some
coaches fail, why is this?
I hope this brief report has helped in some
tiny way about analysing the effectiveness of VOSA. The views
and examples I have shown may just relate to our local region,
and the findings we have come to may not be nationwide. As a local
family coach operator we feel that the effectiveness of VOSA is
at the moment poor, and that their aim to contribute to the improvement
of the road safety and environmental standards, and to the reduction
of vehicle crime isn't being achieved effectively. We feel that
VOSA are at times heavy-handed and this approach causes operators
to be afraid of complaining about problems, due to future consequences
to their businesses. We feel that the individual VI inspectors
and examiners are at times being over-bearing in their approach,
and are more worried about their own performance (and pay packet)
than promoting road safety. And that these examiners performance
are not being monitored correctly to make sure that they are carrying
out their jobs correctly, fairly and reasonably. If the whole
pay structure maybe changed for these examiners, and that their
work was overlooked by a independent agency, this could help promote
road safety. Could there be a traffic commissioner to deal with
VOSA's examiners mistakes? The ideal situation would be for the
operator to act along side VOSA in order to promote road safety,
and if the operator has a problem with certain drivers breaching
the regulations, VOSA will help to enforce them with the operators
help. We feel that if VOSA came down a lot heavier on driver's
breach of the road transport regulations, it would help a lot
to promote road safety. We are at times ashamed of being in a
transport industry such as this, especially with the lies, inconsistencies,
mafia type approach and a complete lack of care to the general
public by VI examiners/inspectors and the general overall performance
of VOSA.
9 January 2006
|
