Archive

Archive for April, 2009

Driver Mis-Fuelling Can Cost Up To £3,000 A Time To Repair Says Lex

April 11th, 2009 No comments

Drivers who mis-fuel their diesel cars with petrol can expect a costly bill to repair the damage, according to Lex Vehicle Leasing.

The Lex maintenance department, which spends around £50m a year on the upkeep of its 123,000 vehicle fleet, is seeing repair costs range from £300-£3,000 depending on the type of diesel engine fitted to the car.
Most at risk are the modern common rail diesels which are built to more exacting tolerances than standard diesel engines. If petrol fuel gets into the common rail diesel system it can mean replacing both low and high pressure fuel pumps, injectors, rail, line filters and tanks, which can easily cost a few thousands pounds to fix.

“The cost of the repair depends on whether the driver has simply started the engine or they have driven it for a few miles with the wrong fuel in the system. The longer the petrol has been in the system, the more money it will cost to repair,” said Jamie Wiseman, Lex Vehicle Leasing’s maintenance manager.

“Manufacturers are now giving their dealers detailed advice as to which stage the mis-fuel has reached and the correcting action they must take. We had two Mercedes common rail diesels to repair recently which cost £3,000 per engine,” he added.

All costs to repair mis-fuels have to be met by the consumer as manufacturer breakdown cover does not cover mis-fuels, although they are likely to come out to your car and take it to the nearest dealership. Also if a car is on a PCP or contract hire agreement it will still be up to the driver to pay for the damage, rather than the finance company.

RightFuel is now the common device to stop diesel mis fuelling.

Actricle taken from carpages.co.uk

Young staff not fit to drive!

April 10th, 2009 No comments

There’s an interesting article in Fleet News  debating the issues around businesses taking on young drivers and the implications on companies insurance. GM motors have taken a brave step of not employing drivers under the age of 22, in a step to reduce their insurance costs which they claim to have come down by £1.2 million in the first two years of introducing this policy. However there is a less drastic alternative, aide automotive have  introduced a new product called the Drivers Eye , an electronic sensor that monitor’s employee’s driving habits, giving immediate feedback and empowering companies to take responsibility for it’s drivers.

This product enables a company to monitor it’ employees whatever their age, however in particular it helps with younger drivers who are less experienced.  Not only does it enable companies to monitor driving habits but it also acts as a deterrent against dangerous driving if an individual knows they’re being monitored!

 

With tougher restrictions from the Health and Safety Executive regarding driving on business and corporate manslaughter, how can managers state they are doing everything reasonably practicable to reduce the daily road risks their drivers face?

 

Matthew Burke of aide automotive believes this product has the answer This excellent device offers companies the ability to monitor drivers whilst they’re out on the road. Low cost and very easily installed The Drivers Eye captures key driving data in terms of speed, distance and sudden braking. This enables managers to assess employees driving habits and take proactive actions to improve the safety of other road users and there own  drivers”.

Transport Friend Website Advises PSV Maintenance

April 9th, 2009 Comments off

Daily walkround check or first use inspection

The check should consist of a walkround look over the whole vehicle or combination. The check should cover the external condition, ensuring in particular that the lights, tyres, wheel fixings, bodywork, trailer coupling, load and ancillary equipment are serviceable. Assistance may be required at some time during the inspection, for example to see that lights are working. A check of wheel nuts must be included as part of a driver’s inspection routine, if wheel trims are fitted, they will have to be removed in order to allow access. Loose wheel nuts feature regularly in the issue of prohibitions (PG9s) and are an obvious and potentially fatal road safety hazard.

Preventative Maintenance Inspections (PMI)

You must also ensure that vehicles are subject to preventative maintenance inspections (PMIs) in line with the time basis specified in your maintenance contract. Your PMI regime must include brake testing. Advice from the Vehicle Operator Services Agency (VOSA) states that reliable brake testing will require access to either a decelerometer or (preferably) a brake roller tester, the latter being available for public use at all goods vehicle testing stations subject to a nominal axle fee.
Operators who do not implement a full maintenance regime, but rely instead on annual test presentations as their main inspection indicator, will be reported to the Traffic Commissioner for non-compliance with an important undertaking attached to their licence. A poor annual test pass rate is indicative of an inadequate forward planning maintenance system.

Link to Transport Friends for further info: CLICK HERE

Wayne Rooney grinds to halt after ‘filling car with wrong petrol’

April 8th, 2009 Comments off

Manchester United footballer Wayne Rooney filled his wife’s Range Rover up with the wrong type of petrol and subsequently broke down, it was reported today.

Rooney, who is married to model and TV presenter Coleen McLoughlin, was driving from Liverpool to Prestbury in Cheshire when he was forced to pull over on the M62.

The customised Range Rover Sport V8 has a turbo-diesel engine – but the 23-year-old filled it up with unleaded petrol. This mistake can cost in the thousands to rectify.

An onlooker said the traffic was going quite slowly at that time so “we got a good look”.

“The hazard lights were flashing on the car and Wayne was standing talking to a Highways Agency patrol driver,” the driver said. “He looked pretty sheepish.”

Rooney has an extensive collection of cars including a BMW M6, Aston Martin Vanquish and a Bentley among others. Keeping up with the footie stars cars would reportedly be worth over £1 million.

All Wayne had to do was fit RightFuel the preventive miss fuelling gadget.

Brake Tester Story

April 8th, 2009 No comments
Truck, bus and car operators should brake test, but  brake testing as described in this article linked is NOT how to do it!!
Brake Tester is a common word for roller brake testers or decelerometers.

Fuel Theft

April 6th, 2009 No comments

Fuel theft from commercial vehicles is big business and can be difficult to spot. Matthew Burke explains how to protect the precious cargo every truck carries.
Theft of fuel is a growing problem that the transport industry is not keen to publicly acknowledge but, privately, many operators admit that it is costing them money and putting increasing pressure on already tight profit margins. Nobody knows what fuel theft costs the UK transport industry each year, but it surely runs into many tens of millions of pounds. With rising fuel prices and diesel at £1 a litre or more in many parts of the country, this could just be the tip of the iceberg. Only a fool would believe that fuel theft will not soar, as opportunist thieves, organised gangs and even staff exploit the potential which the rising market provides.
More and more hard-pressed hauliers – and those who run diesel cars and vans – will be forced to seek alternative – illegal – fuel sources to stay in business.
One of the biggest problems transport operators face is that fuel theft via the regular siphoning of small amounts is hard to detect in an industry where genuine fuel consumption can vary by as much as 25% according to a number of factors, such as the route chosen and the way the vehicle is driven. Given this wide range of variables, the loss of 15-20 litres at a time will almost certainly go unnoticed, but done regularly the losses add up over time.
For example, consider a haulier whose trucks average 2000 miles a week, often parking up overnight and thus vulnerable to opportunist thieves and even driver collusion. Each truck uses around 400 litres of fuel per week and he has 250 of them. Losing 20 litres from each truck at £20 a time adds up to £5000 a week and £260,000 a year – that’s a huge loss off the bottom line and yet the haulier has no way of knowing or, importantly, being able to prove the losses are taking place. Neither is it an extreme example: just consider the size of some of the largest truck fleets on our roads.
We should also not forget that fuel theft can take place internally; it is not just something that happens when trucks are on the road. Companies these days spend tens of thousands of pounds on security for their depots but they may well overlook transport beyond trying to ensure vehicles are not stolen. Organised criminals are clever and capable of looking beyond the obvious. Transport operators cannot therefore assume that just because a truck fills up or waits within the confines of an allegedly secure compound it is immune to fuel theft, which may on occasion be perpetrated in collusion with or by depot staff familiar with the in-house security measures and their a few litres to top up their diesel car, parked within the same secure compound, but each instance adds up.
Of course, a haulier would be able to detect the loss of an entire tank of fuel, but quite frankly what is he going to do about it? He has a vehicle possibly stranded, the schedule is wrecked, the customers are unhappy about late or failed deliveries and the police have weightier matters to worry about.
Gangs of organised criminals routinely steal tanks of fuel worth £500 and more and have the infrastructure in place to resell it on the black market. They operate secure in the knowledge that fuel theft is still considered a low-priority crime and that the chance of getting caught is small. If they are, the penalties are even smaller. The transport operator, meanwhile, risks losing everything. There is a clear message from all of this and that is to prevent fuel theft completely. It can be done: simply, cheaply and effectively.
Moreover, if you prevent fuel theft in the first place by preventing fuel being taken from the fuel tank, you also remove any worries that it may involve drivers or staff, and reduce the need for expensive depot guards, secure CCTV and other perimeter security measures. With all these obvious benefits, plus the fact that anti-fuel theft devices can be bought for a fraction of the cost of a new tyre – the entire UK trucking fleet could be protected for a one-off cost of £40 million (set against an annual transport industry fuel bill of £12 billion). So, does it makes sense for operators to specify them for new trucks and retro-fit existing vehicles? Well, yes and no. While security is important it is not everything in the modern commercial world and good intentions are seriously devalued if fitting an anti-fuel theft device unacceptably interferes with operational efficiency.
Unfortunately, until now that has been the reality. Many devices may stop or reduce fuel theft, but in the process they interfere with efficient fuel filling, producing welling, foaming and splashback, and are not capable of fuel filling at rates up to 120 litres/min, which is rapidly becoming the norm as more high-speed pumps are introduced in the UK and Europe. Adding to an operator’s difficulties, a lot of these devices need to be drilled for fitting or glued for fixing and are not transferable between vehicles. Some are too long to stop theft in the upper levels of a fuel tank, others can be compromised with a simple piece of wire to enable siphoning.
Given all this, it is understandable that many fleet operators have been hedging their bets. But the good news is that they do not have to any longer. Practical solutions that work exist.

aide automotive has a range of anti siphoning devices for truck, van, bus & coach.

Tougher Penalties Article in Quarry Management

April 6th, 2009 Comments off

Quarry Management Magazine (April 2009)  features the tougher penalties issues raised by aide automotive. Find out more at Quarry Management or for more information on products that help businesses overcome issues such as faulty tyres or brakes visit aide automotive.

VOSA Introduce Fixed Penalties for drivers who break regulations!

April 6th, 2009 No comments

VOSA have stated that new powers will come into effect later this year, enabling VOSA examiners and the police to issue on the spot penalties for drivers who are breaking the rules!

 

Fixed penalties and possible points on driver’s licenses will be issued for defects such as faulty tyres and brakes. This emphasises the need for companies to invest in items such as Brake Testers and Tyre Pressure Monitors which will identify any defects rather than leaving discovering these problems to chance.  These products reduce risks by avoiding costly repairs and saving lives!

£100,000 fine for driver’s death after brake failure

April 6th, 2009 No comments

The death of a lorry driver, set alight when a truck overloaded with molten steel slag tipped over, was a “disaster waiting to happen”, a judge has said.

Carl Parsons’ employer, Short Brothers Plant Ltd, admitted breaking health and safety laws and was fined £100,000. Mr Parsons was engulfed in flames when the truck tipped over and the 800C slag ignited diesel spilling from the tank.  The 55-year-old father-of-two from Pontprennau, Cardiff, died two days after the accident in April 2002.

Cardiff Crown Court heard Short Brothers had not done proper health and safety checks on its vehicles at its site at the former Allied Steel and Wire (ASW) works on Rover Way, where Mr Parsons was working. The truck had been modified to carry the scorching hot slag. But the extra weight affected the brakes, which were not tested regularly, the court heard.

Sentencing, Judge Gerald Price QC said the accident could have been avoided as Mr Parson’s death happened “following the defendant’s failure to ensure his safety”.

Prosecutor Bryan Thomas described how part of the truck’s rigging was badly maintained and had seized. He said the brakes were capable of working, but to a reduced effect and the chain on the petrol cap had been broken and not replaced.

“The brakes failed as he drove up a slope to release the waste metal. But the truck rolled back and tipped over igniting the truck’s diesel fuel which had escaped through the leaking cap. .

HSE principal inspector Steve Scott said: “This is a most tragic case, and must serve as a warning to all companies engaged in potentially hazardous activities of the need for thorough and robust health and safety measures to protect their employees.”

Faulty Brakes are an issue not just in the UK

April 6th, 2009 No comments

Faulty brakes are a common cause of accidents not just in the UK.  Regular brake testing can help prevent such incidents as;

 

Sierra Leone
HGV accident in Freetown
At least 4 people died and many others were injured following a lorry collision early on Thursday in east Freetown. Mechanical failure saw an advancing lorry fail to brake, and then collide with a stationary lorry, laden with coal and timber, awaiting fuel. Neither lorry was displaying lights and most of the dead and injured were travelling on the back of one of the lorries. 10th October 2008

 

Luxembourg
HGV customs checks find shortcomings

In the last week HGV technical inspections at the Mertert customs check point in eastern Luxembourg have revealed 21 vehicles with 34 mechanical failings, primarily brakes, steering and suspension. The deficiencies of 3 German lorries saw them immediately banned and towed back to Germany. One lorry with 54 tonnes was 37% over its legal capacity, another notable finding was the number of drivers failing to adhere to mandatory rest periods. 29th October 2008.

 

USA

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reported

That in 2004, 416,000 large trucks were involved in traffic crashes in the U.S., that a total of 5,190 people died (12% of all the traffic fatalities reported in 2004) and an additional 116,000 were injured in those crashes. One out of eight traffic fatalities in 2004 resulted from a collision involving a large truck. In a widely cited study it was reported that brake defects were common and were found in 56% of the tractor-trailers involved in crashes. In the more recent Large Truck Crash Causation Study sponsored by DOT, it was concluded that 29.4% of all large truck crashes involved brake failure, brakes out of adjustment, or other brake related issues.