1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144 
Highway clearance
Page 28
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A recent court case highlighted the sharp difference in costs that operators can pay when one of their vehicles breaks down by the road.
Words: Mike Sherrington
It you have a vehicle that either breaks down on the highway or is involved in a serious accident, the last thing you want to do is to clock up serious recovery charges or have the lorry impounded.
Most haulage companies are locked into tight delivery schedules and want to get their loads moving again as soon as possible. This is particularly true of firms carrying perishable goods or doing just-in-time deliveries To insure against delay, most businesses have contracts with vehicle breakdown agencies to get their lorries towed away to a place of safety where, if the vehicle can't continue with its journey, the goods can be off-loaded onto another unit. Most of these contracts are on a pay-as-you-go basis.
But this arrangement can sometimes come into conflict with the police and the highways authorities, who have a duty to keep the roads clear and the traffic flowing.
These agencies have their own panel of recovery operators that they call on to clear the carriageways.
Until a recent ruling in the High Court in Manchester, some of these recovery firms charged the commercial rate for recovery rather than the statutory costs and kept the vehicle until the bill was paid.
A recent case, brought by lawyers Bacichouse Jones on behalf of an international haulage company, was resolved by the judge ruling that the operator should only pay the statutory costs of £969, rather than foot a bill for £11,000 levied by the recovery company. He further ruled that it was illegal to impound the vehicle.
The cost of recovery
This ruling has not been well received by the Association of Vehicle Recovery Operators (AVRO).Technical helpline manager Brian Drury argues that the statutory costs arc only for the removal of the vehicle, and that any costs associated with recovering it should be additional.
However. Mark Davies, the Backhouse Jones solicitor who brought the Manchester High Court case, argues that the haulage company should not pay the recovery operator anything, but should only pay statutory costs to the police or the highways authorities, and that the recovery firm's bill should be paid by the police.
"At no point has the firm owning a broken-down or damaged vehicle had a contract with the recovery operator, so why should it pay them for removing its vehicle," he says He continues: "Drivers of vehicles being towed away should not agree anything with the recovery operator, and they should only agree to pay the charges set out by law. If they agree to anything else, they have entered into a contract and will be charged the commercial rate, which is likely to be significantly higher."
Greater responsibility
That said, there is still disquiet over the level of statutory charges, even though they were massively increased from October 2008. Drury says: "The new £150 charge for the removal of a car is reasonable. although I know of cases where even that is still not being paid. The charges for larger vehicles are still too low if you consider the fact that recovery vehicles have to carry a considerable amount of specialist gear and do fewer than 8mpg."
Malcolm Bingham, head of road management policy at the Freight Transport Association, adds: "The new charges are calculated in three weight bands: less than 3.5 tonnes: 3.5 tonnes to 18 tonnes; and more than 18 tonnes But there is a considerable amount of difference in recovering an 18-tonne vehicle compared with a 44-tonne fully-loaded artic, and the new charges should reflect that.
"Since the start of this year, the Highways Agency has been given greater responsibility for clearing its roads," he adds. "This allows firms who have contracts with their own recovery operators to use them, provided they can get to the scene in a reasonable time. Not every police force does this. I would like to see them all adopting this approach."
So, to sum up, there are two golden rules for drivers who get involved with the police after a breakdown or accident.
One is to see if they can use the recovery operator their firm has a contract with, and the other is not to agree to pay anything above the statutory charge for removal.
By doing this, they can save money and save contracts with clients keen to see their goods delivered on time.
Association of Vehicle Recovery Operators (AVROI Road Rescue Recovery Association iRRRAl