Reversing alarms

[Tim+]

Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
reversing alarm?

I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or
whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I’ve
never heard it before.

Whatever, it was darned annoying.

Tim


--
Please don't feed the trolls

[Mark Goodge]

On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>reversing alarm?
>
>I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I致e
>never heard it before.

Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
following morning"[1][2].

A "restricted road" is defined as one where "in England and Wales, there
is provided on it a system of street lighting furnished by means of
lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart"[3], which is also the
definition which determines where the default speed limit is 30mph (ie,
a "built-up area")[4].

Assuming, therefore, that you do, indeed, live in a normal built-up area
where the speed limit is 30mph, then the reversing alarm should have
been switched off. A stern letter to the delivery company would be
appropriate, under the circumstances.

[1] The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 s.99
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/99/made

[2] Other than the obvious exceptions for genuine emergencies and use by
the emergency services, which I think is sufficiently a given that I
can't be bothered to provide the actual reference.

[3] Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 s.82
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/82

[4] Ibid. s.81
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/81

Mark

[Fredxx]

On an older van the reversing alarm was only active when the headlamps
were turned off. On occasions I would turn the lights on specifically to
silence it.

[Mark Goodge]

On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 16:27:04 +0100, Fredxx <fre...@nospam.co.uk> wrote:

>On 07/06/2021 12:07, Tim+ wrote:
>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>> reversing alarm?
>>
>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I致e

>> never heard it before.
>>
>> Whatever, it was darned annoying.
>
>On an older van the reversing alarm was only active when the headlamps
>were turned off. On occasions I would turn the lights on specifically to
>silence it.

That seems a little bizarre (the design, not your actions). I would have
thought that a dark winter evening, or foggy day, is precisely the sort
of time when a reversing alarm is most useful.

Mark

[Tim+]

Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>> reversing alarm?
>>
>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I’ve

>> never heard it before.
>
> Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
> gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
> motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
> following morning"[1][2].

I thought rule 2 overrode rule 1 (or have I misinterpreted it)?

Use of audible warning instruments
99.—(1) Subject to the following paragraphs, no person shall sound, or
cause or permit to be sounded, any horn, gong, bell or siren fitted to or
carried on a vehicle which is—
(a)stationary on a road, at any time, other than at times of danger due to
another moving vehicle on or near the road; or
(b)in motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in
the following morning.
(2) The provisions of paragraph (1)(a) do not apply in respect of the
sounding of a reversing alarm when the vehicle to which it is fitted is
about to move backwards and its engine is running.

[Tim+]

Up here you can just about get away without headlights at 4am.

[Graham Truesdale]

Or does that mean that (2) overrides (1)(a)? I.e. the alarm can be sounded on a stationary vehicle which is about to cease to be stationary. I.e. is about to move.

[Mark Goodge]

On 7 Jun 2021 16:50:24 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>>> reversing alarm?
>>>
>>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I?ve

>>> never heard it before.
>>
>> Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
>> gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
>> motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
>> following morning"[1][2].
>
>I thought rule 2 overrode rule 1 (or have I misinterpreted it)?
>
>Use of audible warning instruments
>99.—(1) Subject to the following paragraphs, no person shall sound, or
>cause or permit to be sounded, any horn, gong, bell or siren fitted to or
>carried on a vehicle which is—
>(a)stationary on a road, at any time, other than at times of danger due to
>another moving vehicle on or near the road; or
>(b)in motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in
>the following morning.
>(2) The provisions of paragraph (1)(a) do not apply in respect of the
>sounding of a reversing alarm when the vehicle to which it is fitted is
>about to move backwards and its engine is running.

I think you have misinterpreted it. Note that is specifically "The
provisions of paragraph (1)(a)" which do not apply when rule 2 is in
effect. There is no overide for (1)(b).

In other words, rule 2 only overrides rule 1 insofar as it permits a
reversing alarm to be sounded on a stationary vehicle, prior to it
moving, provided it is about to move. It doesn't override the
prohibition on sounding an alarm during the restricted hours on
restricted roads.

Mark

[steve robinson]

On Mon, 07 Jun 2021 14:49:54 +0100, Mark Goodge
<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>>reversing alarm?
>>
>>I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>>cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or
>>whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I致e
>>never heard it before.
>
>Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
>gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
>motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
>following morning"[1][2].
>
>A "restricted road" is defined as one where "in England and Wales, there
>is provided on it a system of street lighting furnished by means of
>lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart"[3], which is also the
>definition which determines where the default speed limit is 30mph (ie,
>a "built-up area")[4].
>
>Assuming, therefore, that you do, indeed, live in a normal built-up area
>where the speed limit is 30mph, then the reversing alarm should have
>been switched off. A stern letter to the delivery company would be
>appropriate, under the circumstances.
>

>snip

Many new vehicles (mine included) do not have the facility to turn the
reversing alarm off

[Mark Goodge]

I don't see how that can possibly be compliant with the Construction and
Use Regulations. As well as the general prohibition on using them on a
restricted road between the hours of 23:00 and 07:00, they're commonly
prohibted by conditions attached to planning applications for commercial
premises in residential areas (eg, a stipulation that HGVs making
deliveries should not use them). For example, this, from one I found
with a random search on the web:

7. There shall be no audible reversing alarms between 11pm-6am Monday
to Sunday and not before 9am on Sunday and Public Holidays (unless
a scheme for use of broadband, directional alarms can be fitted to
vehicles with the approval of LPA).

Reason: So as to safeguard the amenities of nearby residents.

https://democraticservices.hounslow.gov.uk/(S(d1enaxjwprbgbaq0wvme4gbs))/documents/s23689/02Unit%201%20Challenge%20Road%20Committee1.pdf

So it is often necessary that a reversing alarm can be disabled, and if
that's not a factory-fitted option then the operator may well be obliged
to get a garage to replace the factory-fitted reverse alarm with one
that does have that control built in. Equally, as illustrated in the
planning conditon above, sometimes certain types of reverse alarms are
permitted, and, again, it's the responsibility of the vehicle operator
to ensure that the correct type is fitted. An argument that "this is
what the vehicle came with" wouldn't carry much weight in a court.

Mark

[Pancho]

On 08/06/2021 10:05, Mark Goodge wrote:

>> I thought rule 2 overrode rule 1 (or have I misinterpreted it)?
>>
>> Use of audible warning instruments
>> 99.—(1) Subject to the following paragraphs, no person shall sound, or
>> cause or permit to be sounded, any horn, gong, bell or siren fitted to or
>> carried on a vehicle which is—
>> (a)stationary on a road, at any time, other than at times of danger due to
>> another moving vehicle on or near the road; or
>> (b)in motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in
>> the following morning.
>> (2) The provisions of paragraph (1)(a) do not apply in respect of the
>> sounding of a reversing alarm when the vehicle to which it is fitted is
>> about to move backwards and its engine is running.
>
> I think you have misinterpreted it. Note that is specifically "The
> provisions of paragraph (1)(a)" which do not apply when rule 2 is in
> effect. There is no overide for (1)(b).
>
> In other words, rule 2 only overrides rule 1 insofar as it permits a
> reversing alarm to be sounded on a stationary vehicle, prior to it
> moving, provided it is about to move. It doesn't override the
> prohibition on sounding an alarm during the restricted hours on
> restricted roads.
>

The time prohibition is restricted to moving vehicles.

[steve robinson]

On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 10:17:58 +0100, Mark Goodge

I disagree its OEM fitted equipment that complies with construction
and use regulations if it went to court that can be relied upon as a
defence . You could also toss into the argument that the failure to
use the alarms puts those that are disabled at risk and therefore
breech H&E .

[Tim+]

steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2021 14:49:54 +0100, Mark Goodge
> <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>>> reversing alarm?
>>>
>>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I’ve

>>> never heard it before.
>>
>> Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
>> gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
>> motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
>> following morning"[1][2].
>>
>> A "restricted road" is defined as one where "in England and Wales, there
>> is provided on it a system of street lighting furnished by means of
>> lamps placed not more than 200 yards apart"[3], which is also the
>> definition which determines where the default speed limit is 30mph (ie,
>> a "built-up area")[4].
>>
>> Assuming, therefore, that you do, indeed, live in a normal built-up area
>> where the speed limit is 30mph, then the reversing alarm should have
>> been switched off. A stern letter to the delivery company would be
>> appropriate, under the circumstances.
>>
>> snip
>
> Many new vehicles (mine included) do not have the facility to turn the
> reversing alarm off
>

Certainly my EV doesn’t *appear* to have any way to silence its reversing
sounder but it is a *lot* more discrete that the “grinders” and beepers
fitted to lorries.

What I don’t know is whether it’s automatically deactivated after 23:30.
Given the built in wizardry in modern cars, it’s entirely possible that it
auto-mutes at night.

[Tim+]

Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>> reversing alarm?
>>
>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I’ve

>> never heard it before.
>
> Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
> gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
> motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
> following morning"[1][2].

Hmm, define “siren”?

Many lorries make a weird intermittent grinding or growling noise. Maybe
because they the prohibition? No way could you describe it as a siren.

The legislation would be clear if it simply stated “sounder” if the
intention is to bar all noise making devices.

[Mark Goodge]

Yes, but a reversing alarm is generally used on moving vehicles. It
would be rather superfluous otherwise!

Mark

[Mark Goodge]

On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 11:12:24 +0100, steve robinson
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 10:17:58 +0100, Mark Goodge
><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>So it is often necessary that a reversing alarm can be disabled, and if
>>that's not a factory-fitted option then the operator may well be obliged
>>to get a garage to replace the factory-fitted reverse alarm with one
>>that does have that control built in. Equally, as illustrated in the
>>planning conditon above, sometimes certain types of reverse alarms are
>>permitted, and, again, it's the responsibility of the vehicle operator
>>to ensure that the correct type is fitted. An argument that "this is
>>what the vehicle came with" wouldn't carry much weight in a court.
>>

>I disagree its OEM fitted equipment that complies with construction
>and use regulations if it went to court that can be relied upon as a
>defence . You could also toss into the argument that the failure to
>use the alarms puts those that are disabled at risk and therefore
>breech H&E .

Well, the alternative is that that vehicle cannot be used in locations
and/or times where audible alarms are prohibited. I suppose that would
be OK for a lot of vehicle owners.

Commercial vehicles aren't like cars, though. It's normal, when
purchasing a commercial vehicle, to fit or modify OEM equipment in order
to meet the precise needs of the operator. There are, for example, many
different types of reversing alarm, and planning conditions often
specify a type that is acceptable (eg, a white noise alarm rather than a
"this vehicle is reversing" recording or a tonal bleep).

There's no explicit legislation requiring the use of reviseing alarms.
There is, though, explicit legislation (and many planning conditions)
explicitly prohibiting or otherwise regulating them. It is, therefore,
the responsibility of the operator to ensure that their vehicle complies
with those requirements. The government even published guidance on
"Quiet Deliveries" which includes a section stipulating that "Reversing
alarms should be switched off or modified for white noise":

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/415242/community-and-residents-groups-guidance.pdf
or https://tinyurl.com/mrh96s58

There are plenty of aftermarket suppliers of reversing alarm systems and
components, including what are commonly referred to as "nightshift
overrides" which prevent the alarm sounding at prohibited times. Here,
for example, is one which is available for only around twenty quid (plus
fitting costs):

https://www.beaconsandlightbars.co.uk/NIGHTSHIFT-Override-Switches.html

Or here's a white noise alarm that is compliant with many local
authority planning conditions as well as the "Quiet Deliveries" scheme:

https://www.beaconsandlightbars.co.uk/Brigade-82dB-BBS-Tek-White-Sound-Reversing-Alarm-NAS-PIEK-Approved-PN-BBS-82.html

Given the low cost of modifying a vehicle to be compliant with the law
and local regulations, there is no justification for not doing so where
necessary. It's just part and parcel of being a responsible operator.

Mark

[Mark Goodge]

On 9 Jun 2021 09:47:27 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 7 Jun 2021 11:07:02 GMT, Tim+ <tim.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are there any restrictions or dispensations for a small truck NOT to use a
>>> reversing alarm?
>>>
>>> I was woken at 4:15 am this morning by a milk lorry reversing up our
>>> cul-de-sac. Dunno whether this is a new service to our neighbour or

>>> whether the driver normally turns the sounder off in the wee hours but I?ve

>>> never heard it before.
>>
>> Reversing alarms are inluded in the prohibition on sounding "any horn,
>> gong, bell or siren fitted to or carried on a vehicle which is [...] in
>> motion on a restricted road, between 23.30 hours and 07.00 hours in the
>> following morning"[1][2].
>
>Hmm, define “siren”?

It's not a siren. It's a horn, as defined elsewhere in the legislation:

"horn" means an instrument, not being a bell, gong or siren, capable
of giving audible and sufficient warning of the approach or position
of the vehicle to which it is fitted;

Section 37(10(a):
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/37/made

A reversing alarm, even one which plays a recording rather than a tonal
bleep, is clearly used in a way which brings it within this definition.

Mark

[Roland Perry]

In message <he41cgl27jdhbto7k...@4ax.com>, at 11:12:24 on
Wed, 9 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:

>I disagree its OEM fitted equipment that complies with construction
>and use regulations if it went to court that can be relied upon as a
>defence . You could also toss into the argument that the failure to
>use the alarms puts those that are disabled at risk and therefore
>breech H&E .

Just because a vehicle is street-legal in certain circumstances, doesn't
mean it's incapable of breaking disjoint regulations like speeding (and
in this case, noise).

Try explaining to the beak that you thought 50mph was OK in the High
Street, because your speedo was sufficiently accurate within the terms
of the construction and use regs.
--
Roland Perry

[notya...@gmail.com]

Not as annoying as getting run over by a reversing truck when out on your early morning run or whatever.

[Tim+]

That would only be an annoyance for me, not everyone in my street. ;-)

[Tim+]

Oops, I was wrong. My car is an EV and has a soft “noise maker” that works
up to 15 mph. I just discovered today that the switch that deactivates
that also deactivated the reversing sounder.

[notya...@gmail.com]

Maybe cars should turn their headlights off at night too, but only on your street!

[steve robinson]

On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 12:04:01 +0100, Mark Goodge

I spoke to the dealer today the alarm can not be switched off or
disabled as it flags a fault code.

[steve robinson]

On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 13:09:07 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

This is bugger all to do with speeding its a reverse alarm sounder
that can't be disabled switched off or coded out .

[Tim+]

steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>
> I spoke to the dealer today the alarm can not be switched off or
> disabled as it flags a fault code.
>

Worth bearing in mind that dealers are absolutely NOT authorities on the
wares that they sell. Cars and their gizmos change so quickly these days
many dealers seem to have given up trying to understand them all.

As I posted earlier, I found out myself that I can silence the reversing
sounder in my car. What car do you drive?

[Roland Perry]

In message <bc34cgt6sk60cq7t5...@4ax.com>, at 14:06:02 on
Thu, 10 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:

>>Just because a vehicle is street-legal in certain circumstances, doesn't
>>mean it's incapable of breaking disjoint regulations like speeding (and
>>in this case, noise).
>>
>>Try explaining to the beak that you thought 50mph was OK in the High
>>Street, because your speedo was sufficiently accurate within the terms
>>of the construction and use regs.
>
>This is bugger all to do with speeding its a reverse alarm sounder
>that can't be disabled switched off or coded out .

Send the fine for breaking the noise regulations to the dealer, then.
--
Roland Perry

[Tim+]

Jeff <je...@ukra.com> wrote:
>
>> As I posted earlier, I found out myself that I can silence the reversing
>> sounder in my car. What car do you drive?
>

> Has the law changed as I did not think reversing alarms were generally
> allowed by C&U on cars?

It seems that EVs may be treated differently as they’re essentially silent
at low speeds. New ones all have a discrete built in noise maker when
driving forwards that stops at 15mph. My EV is the first car that has ever
had a reversing sounder as well.

[Mark Goodge]

>I spoke to the dealer today the alarm can not be switched off or
>disabled as it flags a fault code.

Then find a competent independent garage instead.

Mark

[steve robinson]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 15:13:08 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

What fine, all you get is an enforcement notice sent to the premises,
driver/ delivery company won't have any action taken against them.

[steve robinson]

Several but the reverse beepers on the Citroen relay van.

[Mark Goodge]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:06:02 +0100, steve robinson
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>This is bugger all to do with speeding its a reverse alarm sounder
>that can't be disabled switched off or coded out .

"I can't comply with the law, because my vehicle is explicitly designed
to break it" would not be a particularly convincing argument in front of
the bench.

Mark

[Mark Goodge]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 20:14:11 +0100, Mark Goodge

<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:02:33 +0100, steve robinson
><st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 12:04:01 +0100, Mark Goodge
>><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>Given the low cost of modifying a vehicle to be compliant with the law
>>>and local regulations, there is no justification for not doing so where
>>>necessary. It's just part and parcel of being a responsible operator.
>>
>>I spoke to the dealer today the alarm can not be switched off or
>>disabled as it flags a fault code.
>
>Then find a competent independent garage instead.

Or, alternatively, go back to the dealer and demand your money back, on
the grounds that they've sold you a vehicle which doesn't comply with
the law and they are unable (or unwilling) to fix it so that it is
street legal.

Mark

[Tim+]

Jeff <je...@ukra.com> wrote:

> That would require S.99 (3) of the C & U regulations 1986 to have been
> modified, I ma not aware of any such legislation:

That’s not the same as there not being any such legislation. ;-)

Wasn’t hard to find.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-noise-systems-to-stop-silent-electric-cars-and-improve-safety

[Mark Goodge]

On Fri, 11 Jun 2021 10:21:42 +0100, Jeff <je...@ukra.com> wrote:

>On 10/06/2021 18:24, Tim+ wrote:

>That would require S.99 (3) of the C & U regulations 1986 to have been
>modified, I ma not aware of any such legislation:
>

>"(3) No person shall sound, or cause or permit to be sounded, on a road
>any reversing alarm fitted to a vehicle—
>(a) unless the vehicle is a goods vehicle which has a maximum gross
>weight not less than 2000 kg, a bus, engineering plant, or a works truck; or
>(b) if the sound of the alarm is likely to be confused with a sound
>emitted in the operation of a pedestrian crossing established, or having
>effect as if established, under Part III of the 1984 Act."

The point here is that the EV noise module is not a reversing alarm, as
it is not intended specifically to indicate that the vehicle is
reversing. It's a more general audible warning, intended to perform the
function that an engine otherwise would on an IC vehicle.

As such, it would normally be considered a horn (rather than a reversing
alarm) under the definitions used in the C&U regulations, but there are
new, more specific regulations for EVs that override the general C&U
regulations in this specific instance.

It's worth noting, though, that the EV noise module can be disabled by
the driver, so if there are occasions where near-silent running is still
appropriate then that can still be done. That is, after all, one of the
reasons why milk floats are traditionally electric, because they are
typically used in residential streets in the early hours of the morning
when an IC vehicle would be undesirably intrusive.

Mark

[Tim+]

Um, my EV has two distinct modules. One continuous “hum” during froward
motion and an intermittent beeper for reversing.

[notya...@gmail.com]

It would seem that EV's are required to make a noise when they move at slow speeds. Seems fairly obvious that the noise should be different when in reverse. It would also seem likely that the more recent legislation de facto over-rides the earlier law, although whether it de jure repealed I don't know.

[steve robinson]

May be may be not but if the vehicle meets all the legal design
criteria to get approval and is being used within the confines of its
design then their is not much the bench can do as the driver of the
vehicle i haven't broken the law. Those in control of the building may
be subject to additional requirements under planning but that will be
enforced against them not me

[steve robinson]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 20:19:21 +0100, Mark Goodge

My vehicle does comply with the law, their is no obligation in law for
the reverse sensor to have the ability to switch it off

[steve robinson]

[Roger Hayter]

On 13 Jun 2021 at 00:17:39 BST, "steve robinson"

That doesn't make a great deal of sense. The fact that your vehicle can
operate as designed in excess of 100mph does not entitle you to break the
speed limit. Neither does having a fixed reversing alarm entitle you to use
it when operating such an alarm is against the law.

--
Roger Hayter

[Roland Perry]

In message <iim0lr...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:15:39 on Sun, 13
Jun 2021, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:

Exactly, as neither does a fully legal reverse gear entitle you to back
half a mile up a one-way street.

"Why did they fit a reverse gear, if I'm not allowed to use it?"
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

But operating the alarm is not against the law, its also a requirement
under health and safety in many environments
The person or organization breaking the law are those who control the
land in which a planning requirement restricts usage not the drivers
of the vehicles delivering because they wouldn't know that such
restrictions are in place .

Its a little like driving at 60 mph in a country lane when the posted
speed is supposed to be 40 but the signs have long since disappeared
unenforceable.

This is the problem when differing laws clash which takes primacy .

[Mark Goodge]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 00:20:13 +0100, steve robinson

<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 20:19:21 +0100, Mark Goodge
><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 20:14:11 +0100, Mark Goodge
>><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 14:02:33 +0100, steve robinson
>>><st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 09 Jun 2021 12:04:01 +0100, Mark Goodge
>>>><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Given the low cost of modifying a vehicle to be compliant with the law
>>>>>and local regulations, there is no justification for not doing so where
>>>>>necessary. It's just part and parcel of being a responsible operator.
>>>>
>>>>I spoke to the dealer today the alarm can not be switched off or
>>>>disabled as it flags a fault code.
>>>
>>>Then find a competent independent garage instead.
>>
>>Or, alternatively, go back to the dealer and demand your money back, on
>>the grounds that they've sold you a vehicle which doesn't comply with
>>the law and they are unable (or unwilling) to fix it so that it is
>>street legal.
>

>My vehicle does comply with the law, their is no obligation in law for
>the reverse sensor to have the ability to switch it off

But there is an obligation to not sound a reversing alarm under certain
circumstances (eg, on a restricted street during restricted hours, or
when making deliveries to a location subject to a planning condition
regulating them). So, if you are unwilling to have your vehicle modified
to give you the ability to disable the reversing alarm, your only other
lawful alternative is to never reverse the vehicle at any time and place
where those restrictions apply.

Mark

[steve robinson]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 11:15:02 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

Backing up isn't the issue its the fact your traveling the wrong way
up a one way street that's the issue as apposed to maneuvering your
vehicle into a parking bay , drive or into a loading area which is
permitted.

The argument then goes to what's acceptable when maneuvering in a one
way street how far would you need to travel before the reversing is no
longer seen as maneuvering but traveling in the wrong direction

[Mark Goodge]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:42:08 +0100, steve robinson

It *is* against the law under certain circumstances. The relevant
legislation has been referred to on several occasions previously in this
thread.

>its also a requirement
>under health and safety in many environments

That's why it needs to be configurable, so that you can use it where
appropriate and not where inappropriate.

>This is the problem when differing laws clash which takes primacy .

The law which takes primacy is the law which says that you must not
sound a reversing alarm in a restricted street during the restricted
hours. Especially since there is no law which compels a reversing alarm
to be sounded in those circumstances.

Mark

[Roland Perry]

In message <bqrbcg9vhma87oalq...@4ax.com>, at 12:49:02 on
Sun, 13 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:

There's a street near me which is not only pedestrianised, but has "No
Entry" signs at one end, even for those handful of vehicles exempted
from the pedestrianisation. Vans and minibuses frequently BEEPBEEP
reverse BEEPBEEP through the BEEPBEEP no entry BEEPBEEP signs BEEPBEEP.

I don't think the beeper being otherwise legal would hold much water in
the magistrates court.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:51:29 +0100, Mark Goodge

Health and safety at work act requires that you take suitable
precautions when reversing vehicles, disability legislation also
requires you put suitable systems in place to protect visually
impaired employees and visitors .

One of the main systems they suggest is reversing alarms, another is
high visibility flashing led warning lights.

What ever you do you can't win.

I don't honestly think its the beep toners that are the issue on small
vans its the this vehicle revering and wailers that are the problem .

[Mark Goodge]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 18:30:09 +0100, steve robinson
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:51:29 +0100, Mark Goodge
><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>The law which takes primacy is the law which says that you must not
>>sound a reversing alarm in a restricted street during the restricted
>>hours. Especially since there is no law which compels a reversing alarm
>>to be sounded in those circumstances.
>

>Health and safety at work act requires that you take suitable
>precautions when reversing vehicles, disability legislation also
>requires you put suitable systems in place to protect visually
>impaired employees and visitors .

Yes, but there's no legislation which explicitly compels the use of
reversing alarms. They are merely a matter of guidance. Strong guidance,
in most cases, but still only guidance. So any situation where use of
them is explicitly unlawful overrides the guidance.

In fact, the guidance issued to HGV operators specifically mentions
circumstances where reversing alarms cannot be used, and stipulates
that, instead, a banksman should be employed wherever possible.

Mark

[steve robinson]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:59:50 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>

It all depends on circumstances if its a delivery of stock to a shop
then its likely action would eventually be taken for non compliance
however its all around circumstances , we have a similar situation in
the centre of Birmingham where deliveries are not permitted between
certain hours of the morning and evening rush hours , however,
maintenance vehicles and disability vehicles are allowed access
often through no entry signs , Infact they have installed retractable
bollards on some sections to stop shops abusing the system . I had a
muppet in a car try and follow me through a couple of years ago
thought tail gating me would allow her to sneak in result a rather
badly damaged car.

If the beep beep beep is driving you nuts its doing its job its making
you aware of the surrounding vehicles. I don't honestly think the
bleep toner units are the problem (ones fitted to smaller vans) its
the this vehicle is reversing units fitted to most hgv that are the
cause of annoyance , these are often very loud to stop them being
drowned out by the lorry engines .

[Roland Perry]

In message <pbeccgh99qinkhvh3...@4ax.com>, at 18:18:17 on

Sun, 13 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:

>>There's a street near me which is not only pedestrianised, but has "No
>>Entry" signs at one end, even for those handful of vehicles exempted
>>from the pedestrianisation. Vans and minibuses frequently BEEPBEEP
>>reverse BEEPBEEP through the BEEPBEEP no entry BEEPBEEP signs BEEPBEEP.
>>
>>I don't think the beeper being otherwise legal would hold much water in
>>the magistrates court.
>
>It all depends on circumstances if its a delivery of stock to a shop
>then its likely action would eventually be taken for non compliance
>however its all around circumstances , we have a similar situation in
>the centre of Birmingham where deliveries are not permitted between
>certain hours of the morning and evening rush hours , however,
>maintenance vehicles and disability vehicles are allowed access
>often through no entry signs , Infact they have installed retractable
>bollards on some sections to stop shops abusing the system . I had a
>muppet in a car try and follow me through a couple of years ago
>thought tail gating me would allow her to sneak in result a rather
>badly damaged car.
>
>If the beep beep beep is driving you nuts its doing its job its making
>you aware of the surrounding vehicles. I don't honestly think the
>bleep toner units are the problem (ones fitted to smaller vans) its
>the this vehicle is reversing units fitted to most hgv that are the
>cause of annoyance , these are often very loud to stop them being
>drowned out by the lorry engines .

The BEEPBEEPs above aren't driving me nuts - it's the drivers who think
it's OK to reverse past a No-Entry sign (and simultaneously reverse into
a pedestrianised area) who are doing that.

[In the context of other places with early-morning bans on noisy
activity, including horns and beepers, it's the local residents trying
to sleep - rather than cross the road - who risk being driven nuts]

But even when vehicles are legitimately trying to reverse inside
pedestrianised areas, the presence of the beepers apparently gives them
moral authority to sweep pesky pedestrians aside, in a way that would
probably not be acceptable[1] were they using their regular horn
travelling forwards.

In the location I mentioned, it's possible for commercial (and other
exempt) vehicles to enter the pedestrianised area forwards, but only by
doing what they clearly regard as an inconvenient half mile detour.

[1] About a year ago I was beeped by a classic white van that was
probably allowed inside the same pedestrianised area (because he was
excepted on account of unloading) but sadly the particular entrance
to that area I was standing in (having a conversation, I wasn't
stopped purely out of spite) was clearly marked with a "No Motor
Vehicles" [aka 'beware low flying motorcyles'] sign which unlike
other entrances has no "Except..." plate underneath[2].

As he kept nudging forward and sounding his horn, and a couple of
large blokes associated with the place he was delivering to
approached in a menacing fashion, I did decide to cease the
conversation with another pedestrian, and step aside, rather than
get some first hand experience of calling 999 after having been
subjected to a personal assault.

[2] Not that I've ever seen an "Except Google Streetcars", but they are
caught on their own camera there, at the no-exceptions-plate
location too.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 19:31:19 +0100, Mark Goodge

<use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 18:30:09 +0100, steve robinson
><st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 13 Jun 2021 12:51:29 +0100, Mark Goodge
>><use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>The law which takes primacy is the law which says that you must not
>>>sound a reversing alarm in a restricted street during the restricted
>>>hours. Especially since there is no law which compels a reversing alarm
>>>to be sounded in those circumstances.
>>
>>Health and safety at work act requires that you take suitable
>>precautions when reversing vehicles, disability legislation also
>>requires you put suitable systems in place to protect visually
>>impaired employees and visitors .
>
>Yes, but there's no legislation which explicitly compels the use of
>reversing alarms. They are merely a matter of guidance. Strong guidance,
>in most cases, but still only guidance. So any situation where use of
>them is explicitly unlawful overrides the guidance.
>
>In fact, the guidance issued to HGV operators specifically mentions
>circumstances where reversing alarms cannot be used, and stipulates
>that, instead, a banksman should be employed wherever possible.
>
>Mark

I know but banksmen are also discouraged during hours of darkness
because they can't be seen , unless you light the area up like a
Christmas tree then you get complaints about light pollution.

Glad im near enough retired now

[steve robinson]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 08:58:48 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

One of the issue is the pedestrians of high streets and some town
center, many of these business only access for loading is through the
shop front , ok when it was the horses and cart or little Morris minor
van but completely unrealistic with 44 tonne Articulated multi drop
lorries plus trying to negotiate your way round some of the back lanes
in the large wagons is an absolute nightmare.

[Roland Perry]

In message <u7iecghojku8t1eaa...@4ax.com>, at 13:27:28 on
Mon, 14 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>

Sure, but reversing the wrong way up a one way street is not a
sustainable solution.

There are also many businesses you can't get an HGV within several
hundred yards of. So deliveries have to be manhandled in cages. The
Parcel Yard pub at Kings Cross for example.

--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 16:02:38 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>

I agree its not for general deliveries

[JNugent]

On 14/06/2021 04:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:

> Sure, but reversing the wrong way up a one way street is not a
> sustainable solution.

Reversing in a one way street is surely not illegal. If it were not so,
most parking places, including meter bays, would be all but
inaccessible. Likewise reversing onto or off private land (such as
driveways). Reversing as part of a manoeuvre (as opposed to making
progress as part of the journey) cannot be illegal.

> There are also many businesses you can't get an HGV within several
> hundred yards of. So deliveries have to be manhandled in cages. The
> Parcel Yard pub at Kings Cross for example.

Could deliveries be made there from a smaller vehicle?

[Roland Perry]

In message <iirm36...@mid.individual.net>, at 13:51:31 on Tue, 15
Jun 2021, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> remarked:

>On 14/06/2021 04:02 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Sure, but reversing the wrong way up a one way street is not a
>>sustainable solution.
>
>Reversing in a one way street is surely not illegal. If it were not so,
>most parking places, including meter bays, would be all but
>inaccessible.

If you read my earlier posting again, you'll see that the issue I have
is with people reversing *THROUGH the no-entry signs* at the end of a
street.

There is also the concept of (once legally on a street) reversing an
excessive distance, even if a short distance would be OK.

>> There are also many businesses you can't get an HGV within several
>>hundred yards of. So deliveries have to be manhandled in cages. The
>>Parcel Yard pub at Kings Cross for example.
>
>Could deliveries be made there from a smaller vehicle?

Perhaps you are unsighted as to the location of that pub? It's upstairs
in the middle of the station, 95% surrounded by tracks and platforms,
and 5% by the generally regarded as pedestrianised main concourse. It
does have a service lift, but you'd need to wheel things across the
concourse in a cage.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 13:51:31 +0100, JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

Not always cost effective

[Roland Perry]

In message <vdrjcgdv53qe95e7f...@4ax.com>, at 13:26:42 on
Wed, 16 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>
remarked:

If someone is suggesting a smaller (much much smaller, and perhaps
milk-float sized electric vehicle) for deliveries all the way from the
supply depot to the foot of the stairs up to the pub (assuming such a
vehicle is allowed to mix with the passengers running to catch trains),
then I fear the Plot Has Been Completely Lost.

What I expect they do, however, is drive a regular-sized truck and park
it on the double-yellow-lines in the road between Kings Cross and St
Pancras, then wheel cages one at a time the final hundred yards.

My proposition is that if you can do that at numerous sites such as
Kings Cross, then it's not necessary to insist on driving trucks *right
up to the door* of shops in pedestrianised areas in the provinces.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:53:42 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

All down to time though Roland, i know my SIL used to be given 15
minutes per drop and many drops are now time sensitive , take Tesco's
they give the delivery drivers a time slot for instance 2:30 in the
afternoon if you turn up at 3:00 they send the delivery away or fine
you same if you turn up early so any run over earlier in the day can
cause mayhem with other loads

[Roland Perry]

In message <f0vjcg17k1tdel964...@4ax.com>, at 14:36:06 on

Tesco are infamous for claiming in defence of planning permission for a
new store that their delivery vehicles won't in fact block the adjacent
pedestrian crossing, or inconvenience the through traffic because
they'll use smaller vans. Then proceed to turn up with infringing HGVs.

I'm more interested in smaller retailers who will outnumber Tesco by
100:1 in a typical small town.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:43:11 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>

Same problem, many wholesalers run through logistics companies like
exel so will deliver to several outlets / independants from central
storage facilities, for smaller deliveries they couriers again
multidropping on the high streets , rare to get small one of
deliveries these days , usually high end products in high end outlets

[Roland Perry]

In message <la8ncg19bbtcsbr2n...@4ax.com>, at 20:29:57 on
Thu, 17 Jun 2021, steve robinson <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk>

For regular deliveries it should be easy for the system to have some
kind of metric for the "last half mile", because not every shop opens
onto a street (pedestrianised or otherwise).

A more extreme example than the pub at Kings Cross would be shops in the
departure lounge at airports. And back in the day the restaurant at the
top of the Post Office Tower.
--
Roland Perry

[steve robinson]

On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:01:20 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>

Airport shop deliveries are a nightmare everything nas to go through
scanners .(i used to refit airport shops complete nightmare to do
everything had to be scanned including our tools, we used to need
security clearance that could take up to 6 months to get,deliveries
were restricted everything we did took 3 times as long permits for
everything

Its easy enough to implement its just down to cost , even more so now
as mechanization reduces the costs on the large hubs