Towing without an additional test - consultation

[ThundercatRob]

I find the current rules irritating that I can only tow 750kgs with a Disco 4, but a friend could tow over double with something like an Audi A4.

As said above, which is safer! But as this is about licensing, either everyone should need a licence, or no one should. So the grandfather rights should be scrapped and everyone should have to do a test.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by ThundercatRob

As said above, which is safer! But as this is about licensing, either everyone should need a licence, or no one should. So the grandfather rights should be scrapped and everyone should have to do a test.

Everyone does need a license - that’s why pre97 license holders have grandfather rights.

[TmMorris]

Originally Posted by ThundercatRob

I find the current rules irritating that I can only tow 750kgs with a Disco 4, but a friend could tow over double with something like an Audi A4.

As said above, which is safer! But as this is about licensing, either everyone should need a licence, or no one should. So the grandfather rights should be scrapped and everyone should have to do a test.

The key here though is that you would have chosen to buy the Disco in full knowledge of what you could legally tow and knowing that 750kg was all you needed. As such, in your case, it's a non issue.

It's more of an issue for the people who don't bother finding out what they can and can't do before buying their cars or kit but these are the exact people who are showing that they need to be tested as they aren't really paying attention.

So it all works pretty well especially as someone who has the money to potter about in 2.5 ton SUVs burning fuel can easily afford the cost of the test.

I suspect the review is just to check if the general rules, 25 years on from their change, need any tinkering and it seems more likely that there will be a tightening of the rules as that's what the loudest people generally demand, that everyone else is more regulated.

A logical change may transpire to be to remove the 3.5 ton limit from the post 97 exemptions and just have it so that anything more than 750kg requires a test? Something that probably makes sense to change for everyone given the caravan carnage these days where people clearly haven't bothered to teach themselves how to drive or what the rules are.

And that's the general problem for boat owners, that the review is mostly about people towing caravans and horses as you don't usually see people towing boats or cars getting stuck or doing 30 on the A303 with over 300 cars trapped behind them for miles and refusing to pull over. As was my great pleasure to witness heading back from the coast a couple of days ago.

[ThundercatRob]

My point was more that the Grandfather rights that the Pre97 get as part of their licence makes them no safer, or better drivers (maybe worse) than drivers who completed their licence after 97 and completed a B+E test, for example.

If you want everyone towing a trailer to be of basically the same standard, and understand the rules, then everyone needs to be tested to the same standard. Grandfather rights don't do this, which was my point.

From a personal point of view, i would be more than happy if they scrapped the B+E test requirement for post 97 and the licences automatically got the categories like Pre 97 as it would allow me to tow greater than 750kgs. At the moment, its not an issue as my SIB and trailer are light.

I actually think a better option would be more of a certificate of competence, completed by a trailing school, rather than a DVSA test - Anyone can learn to pass a test, doesn't make them a good driver. A competency test could be better tailored to what the driver was looking to tow and would probably end up with better trailer drivers on the road.

Anyway, i thought this consultation was looking to reduce the need for licencing, not increase it due the the shortage of drivers, and lack of testing capacity?

[Pikey Dave]

Originally Posted by ThundercatRob

My point was more that the Grandfather rights that the Pre97 get as part of their licence makes them no safer, or better drivers (maybe worse) than drivers who completed their licence after 97 and completed a B+E test, for example.

If you want everyone towing a trailer to be of basically the same standard, and understand the rules, then everyone needs to be tested to the same standard. Grandfather rights don't do this, which was my point.

From a personal point of view, i would be more than happy if they scrapped the B+E test requirement for post 97 and the licences automatically got the categories like Pre 97 as it would allow me to tow greater than 750kgs. At the moment, its not an issue as my SIB and trailer are light.

I actually think a better option would be more of a certificate of competence, completed by a trailing school, rather than a DVSA test - Anyone can learn to pass a test, doesn't make them a good driver. A competency test could be better tailored to what the driver was looking to tow and would probably end up with better trailer drivers on the road.

Anyway, i thought this consultation was looking to reduce the need for licencing, not increase it due the the shortage of drivers, and lack of testing capacity?

Very rarely are new laws & regulations retrospective. The only ones that spring to mind are the alterations to the Firearms regs that restricted pump action shotguns to 3 shots, & the hand gun ban after Hungerford & Dunblane. To remove grandfather rights for towing would be impractical, suddenly you have a large contingent that can’t tow their caravans/boats/trailers and a huge backlog of tests. By definition “grandfather” rights will die out with the grandfathers. So in 30 years time or so, everyone will have passed a towing test.

[ThundercatRob]

Yes, but are they not proposing to give everyone B+E off the bat, rather than removing GF rights? So, everyone could tow the same limit regardless of when they passed their test. My understanding was due to the lack of drivers and testing capacity?

[GuyC]

I think you are confusing passing a test with a competence to tow. As with many things you only start learning to tow once you've been given a license to do so and you start towing. Whether getting a license was as a result of a test or because you are an old fart is almost irrelevant.

[TmMorris]

Originally Posted by ThundercatRob

Yes, but are they not proposing to give everyone B+E off the bat, rather than removing GF rights? So, everyone could tow the same limit regardless of when they passed their test. My understanding was due to the lack of drivers and testing capacity?

Yup. It's a cost and backlog aspect that has primarily triggered the review but I think what is being alluded to above is that while that may be the reason behind the process it may not transpire to be the direction of the end result once they look at crash data, revenue potential etc.

The big question is whether the review will include the view of the insurance industry as you might well end up with a situation where the Govt decides to drop the cost of testing people but the insurance industry then deciding not to cover drivers unless they've taken a private, approved course for £17m and four nights in Louisiana State Penitentiary over a desk.

[ThundercatRob]

Yes exactly.

I expect your average caravanner or 5/6m Rib owner probably doesn't even need to do the additional B+E test. They could probably tow 1.5tons behind a Mondeo without being tested. The thing is though its probably going to be a lot more difficult to control that rig, than if you had a 1.5 ton trailer behind something bigger. like a 4x4 etc (but you couldn't because then you would need B+E).

As with many things, the current regulations don't make much sense!

[TmMorris]

They're ok. The typical modern family car can easily and safely tow a braked trailer. It's a personal choice to have a 2.5 ton car over a 1.5 ton one and should you need to tow more than a ton you can just sit the test, which is quite prudent to do with a rig in excess of 3.5 tons.

[HDAV]

Just heard on radio over turned caravan on the M4 3 lanes closed…. Wonder if the driver had passed a trailer test? If they needed a trailer test for the rig they rolled? Would a test have prevented the incident???

[ThundercatRob]

Who knows. Depends on the setup.

You could work out from pictures if the setup required a B+E test if the driver had passed their test post 97.

[Poly]

Well it appears they have made their decision and no longer a requirement for trailer test to tow with a car. Not sure how long before the rules come in force or if they will be indefinite/ give grandfather rights to those of us in that category or will just be a temporary exemption whilst they sort out the mess….

[HDAV]

Originally Posted by Poly

Well it appears they have made their decision and no longer a requirement for trailer test to tow with a car. Not sure how long before the rules come in force or if they will be indefinite/ give grandfather rights to those of us in that category or will just be a temporary exemption whilst they sort out the mess….

Any link?

[DanExe]

Originally Posted by HDAV

Any link?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/new-rule...law%20changing

Having just spent £800 on B+E training and tests, it’s a bit of a pain in the bottom/wallet. Glad I had the training though. It’s quite involved.

I think there should be some sort of trailering CBT, run by the current trailer instructors who are soon going to be out of a job - especially given the amount of accidents involving towing.

[HDAV]

Thanks for the link training is very rarely a bad thing how do you encourage training without the exam tho

[ThundercatRob]

Good good, I’m personally happy.

[Poly]

Originally Posted by HDAV

Thanks for the link training is very rarely a bad thing how do you encourage training without the exam tho

I think the gov missed the opportunity there to say if you do x hours of training with an approved instructor we will add the category to you license but if you don’t you miss out (they could have left tests for people who prefer not to get training as an alternative route).

[Iankristy]

The question will be is how will insurance companies treat this. Will they require proof of competence to insure people? Bit like to work on gas the regulations state you need to be ‘competent’ and there’s only one way to show that.

[beamishken]

Originally Posted by Poly

I think the gov missed the opportunity there to say if you do x hours of training with an approved instructor we will add the category to you license but if you don’t you miss out (they could have left tests for people who prefer not to get training as an alternative route).

Thats a very good suggestion but I suspect that they back tracked on the tests because it didnt add to road safety. The govt will have the accident statistics before & after the implementation of the test & presumably they know it didn't increase road safety overall. Probably more accidents caused by cars close to their max towing limit trying to stay under 3500kg than there would be if folk could use a bigger vehicle and be legal. Imho a bigger heavier tow vehicle adds more to safety when towing something around 1500-2000kg than all the training in the world. The training seems to concentrate on slow speed maneuvering & reversing which might help avoid embarrassing situations but I'd wager most bad accidents happen at 50+mph when the tail starts wagging the dog because the car is marginal for the combination.
We might see more slipway entertainment now when folk cant reverse but I doubt there will be more bad accidents on the motorways.

Sent from my SM-G950F using RIB Net mobile app