Hiya,
Wasnt the rule for vehicle 12 years or older 6 weeks, and anything younger , 12 weeks?
Whats changed, i might be confused 
C
Just interested in peoples opinion on this.
Our SOV is regularly “donated” to Sqn Camps, to be used to ferry cadets from one place to another. At these camps there might be 50 different people that might use the minibus.
How would an OC of the Sqn the minibus belongs to AND the Civcom, that prolly wont have a representation at the camp, be able to make sure that however drives it is capable or legally allowed to?
Seems harsh for them to take responsibility for something they have no control over, and will almost certainly lead to sqns not wanting to donate their minibuses to multi sqn events?
C
1 Like
As far as I remember, despite the DVSA guidelines being as shown above, HQAC Policy said 6 weeks regardless of age.
1 Like
You have a vehicle log book that lists individual authorised drivers and a log where the driver for each journey is recorded.
Doesn’t stop people from being dishonest about it but it’s a way of providing assurance.
As well as above with having a log that lists authorized drivers, you need to be careful ‘loaning out’ your SOV, especially under permit 19 rules. I was under the impression that if it was being used for a Wing activity in the way you describe, then the Wing CWC would need their own permit 19 with their own authorized driver list etc.
The simple answer is you can’t, there fore you shouldn’t. At least not under your permit.
I may be completely wrong there, and happy to be corrected though.
- The Civilian Committee, with assurance provided through the OC Sqn, are responsible for recording all driver competence checks and driver training as well as licence details. They are to ensure that only qualified, responsible, and competent individuals drive the SOVs.
it would certainly make me think twice about lending mine, if i couldnt be sure who was driving my minibus, especially if me or my civcom would end up being responsible if someone weren’t “competent”, whatever “competent” means.
C
we do for our own Sqn staff, but no necessarily for staff from other Sqns that might use it on a camp or event etc
C
Does the Wing CWC have their own Permit 19 for your minibus that you’re lending out?
yes, we learnt a while ago, that the permit 19 has to reflect the local organisation that might be using it. Normally that would be our own Sqn, so thats fine, but when its used for a Wing event, we had to get a Permit 19 , for each vehicle, detailing all the possible Sqns that might use it
C
In theory then, if the bus is being driven on the Wings permit, not yours, then it should be them keeping a log of who is competent and qualified. 1 bus but two seperate permit holders and two seperate lists of people who are allowed to drive it?
1 Like
Wonder if this update is going to promulgated to squadrons!!
BTW do Wing have someone specifically looking at MT 
This is a worry, will be plenty of ocs and cwc that are maybe un aware of their updated responsibilities 
C
I expect it’s one of these things that varies, but ours does.
These aren’t increases in responsibility but actually moving an IBN (from ~2020) into actual policy with some sensible adjustments.
1 Like
Has the 6-weekly inspection requirement actually gone away?
It was only ever for vehicles over 12 years old and that requirement is still there in the list you posted (para e)
2 Likes
All the CWC and OC Sqn can get is a moaning at from the chain of command.
It is the Drivers responsibility to be legal and compliant to the rules of the road. If they break the rules they are the ones getting prosecuted, the Police won’t care about RAFAC policy or ‘rules’.
What could be a point is ‘is the driver, driving the vehicle with the owners consent?’. Otherwise the owner could say no and then the driver can be done for ‘Taking the vehicle without the owners consent’.
The insurance could be interesting if an accident were to happen, if the Driver isn’t legal then that would be null and void.
When it comes to permit 19, this isn’t 100% true. It is not just up to the driver. The permit holder, ie the CWC have specific responsibilities, in law, not RAFAC policy.
Further, the organisation does have responsibility to make sure our cadets are safe, and so they can add extra layers if they so wish.
In this case, they are sticking pretty close to standard legislation, as @themajor has said.
1 Like
So when our sov was used in the past even when part of wing or area camps the drivers still needed authorising by the Sqn CO - it wasn’t a carte blanc for any qualified driver on camp they had to go through & comply with the Sqns mt process & orders.
As it should be. Especially if driving on your permit!
2 Likes
Also worthy to note is the seating capacity on a standard P19. ‘No more than 16 passengers’. Therfore, the normal Ford Transit 17 seater is too big.
Its harder to get a ‘Large Bus’ permit.
People passing a car.test before Jan 1997 don’t need a P19 as they probably have the entitlement as grandfarther rights.
For drivers passing car licence after Jan 1997 the weight must not exceed 3500kg, which even the 15 seat Transit exceeds. It used to be the Fiat Type lightweight minibus was the only suitable type.
A 17 seat transit has a Gross Vehicle Weight of 4600kg.
15 seat Transit 4100kg
12 seat Transit 3500kg
Don’t get me started on overloading! A 12 seater loaded with 12 passengers, 1 driver and 12 bags with a full tank of fuel, is likly to be overweight (overall or just an axle) and then there’s restricting the exits. The Police and especially VOSA take a dim view on this.