Left-Hand Drive HGV's: Dangers and Solutions
Introduction
The relaxation of trade barriers and the growth of the European Union have led to an increase in the number of left-hand drive HGV’s (LHD HGV’s) using Britain’s roads. In 2003, a Department for Transport survey found that in ten years the number of left-hand drive HGV’s on Britain’s roads had increased by almost two and a half times (1). It was estimated in 2005 that 10,000 LHD HGV’s were working on Britain’s roads everyday (2). The DfT found that over two-thirds of the travel was on motorways, with the average round trip being 640 kilometres. The average length of stay in the UK was less than two days and around 20% of LHD HGV’s made at least one trip to the UK a week (1).
European Union Driving Regualtions
If a driver holds a valid driving licence from an EU member state they are eligible to drive in the UK for the term of their licence. The full entitlement for the vehicle they are driving must be shown on the licence. If a driver immigrates to the UK their driving licence is valid for five years before they must apply for a UK licence.
Collision and Driving Offences
The figures available are limited because of the new nature of the problem. At this date there is only collision data available for 2005. In that year there were 1,014 Personal Injury Collisions involving LHD HGV’s, which made up 0.5% of the total number of collisions for 2005 (3). The level of driving offences committed by LHD HGV drivers is also a danger on Britain’s roads. VOSA found that drivers’ hour’s offences are detected in 3.7% of UK drivers, but this rises to 12.8% for overseas drivers (4).
Safety Concerns
The most obvious safety concern is blind spots. LHD vehicles are not designed for use on Britain’s roads. As a result blind spots can be larger than with British vehicles. This is most pronounced when the vehicle has other road users coming up the far side or when turning right. The danger of blind spots is highlighted by the 2005 DfT figures; in 32% of the collisions involving LHD HGV’s, “vehicle blind spot” was found to be a contributory factor (3). This is a large share of the collisions, suggesting steps need to be taken to negate this factor. Driver behaviour could further compound blind spot issues; overseas drivers are not required to undertake any training and testing before driving on Britain’s roads. Thus, drivers may not have the required experience to tackle the visibility issues they encounter making them even more susceptible to collisions as they learn on the job. Drivers may also fail to pay due care and attention to the environment and users around them, resulting in manoeuvres that are both inappropriate for the conditions and a hazard to other more vulnerable road users.
Driver inexperience is not just limited to awareness but also traffic law. Every European state has it’s own traffic laws. Without co-ordinated driving laws the driver must constantly adapt their behaviour to suit each country. The difficulties faced can be more pronounced in Britain because of unique features that exist. Overseas drivers may not be aware of the speed limits that apply to the type of vehicle they are driving; the variation in motorway limits, which require HGV’s to drive at 50 miles per hour, offers an example of how HGV’s are treated differently to other road users. The nuances of road behaviour may also differ; Give Way rules and expected behaviour offer examples of where HGV drivers could become confused resulting in drivers moving at incorrect times or in an aggressive manner that alarms other road users.
Overseas drivers may also become confused by Britain’s imperial system. This could lead to confusion over converting speed limits and distances into kilometres. A lack of knowledge of UK driving law, practices and measurements can confuse and frustrate the driver possibly leading to rash actions and a drop in concentration. The varying degrees of testing and examination throughout Europe may also cause problems on UK roads. Each member state has its own testing standards; some may not be as stringent as UK tests, thus allowing an individual unqualified by UK standards to drive legally on the road network.
The issue extends beyond the drivers to the actual vehicle themselves. As with road traffic laws there is no European wide code of maintenance standards. Not all EU countries have maintenance standards as stringent as those operating in Britain. As a result HGV’s that would be deemed unsafe by British standards are able to use the British transport network. The possibility of a EU wide maintenance scheme is currently being investigated, however, due to the varying standards it is unlikely that standards will be brought into line with the UK’s stringent regulations.
There are also enforcement issues with LHD HGV’s. At this time there is no centralised EU database of driving offences. Without this piece of technology drivers that are banned in one country can continue to drive, and accumulate points, in another without the knowledge of law enforcement agencies. It is also hard to track foreign drivers once they have left Britain preventing the police from effectively prosecuting and bringing to trial this group of drivers. These two factors make it difficult for British agencies to enforce traffic law on overseas drivers.
Solutions
Technology has a significant part to play in making LHD vehicles safer on British roads. New legislation has been passed requiring all HGV’s registered after 26th January 2007 with a mass between 3.5 and 7 tonnes to be fitted with Class V mirrors (5). These mirrors reduce the size of blind spots giving HGV drivers a better view of the road. However, this will not cover the estimated 5 million HGV’s that already operate throughout Europe; Government estimates assume that it will take at least 16 years to fit Class V mirrors to all HGV’s (5). The mirrors can be retrospectively fitted but this is not a requirement by law. However, the EU is investigating the feasibility of implementing a retrofitting directive in January 2008 (5). The short-term influence of this measure will, until retrofitting is enforced, be limited.
The DfT is also carrying out trials with Fresnel window lenses, which applied to the passenger window will magnify the side view improving visibility. 40,000 lenses were distributed at French ports in December 2006 (6). A report will be published on the experiment in spring 2007 but so far the initial feedback is positive. Improvements in camera technology can also help to negate the dangers of LHD HGV’s on British roads. Small cameras can be fitted to the HGV’s mirrors to provide a more complete picture of the road.
These measures will only work if the driver uses them regularly and effectively.
Improving driver visibility is only one measure that can be taken to improve LGV safety. Another means of utilising technology to improve safety could be the use of early warning systems. One such system on the market warns vulnerable road users when a HGV in tends to turn. Similar to the reverse warning, a sound is emitted, to warn other road users when the vehicle drops below a certain speed and the indicator is switched on. As two thirds of LHD HGV travel is on Britain’s Motorways, where manoeuvres are carried out at faster speeds, this system may only have a limited effect. The system may not actually encourage safer driving from LHD drivers but the reverse because it does not encourage HGV drivers to alter their behaviour but relies on other road users reacting themselves. Furthermore, as HGV drivers become secure with the technology they may expect road users to automatically move on hearing the sound or the system may be used to intimidate vulnerable road users to move (7).
Sensors, similar to those on cars for reversing, could also be installed along the side of HGV’s to inform drivers when a vehicle, pedestrian or cyclist is along side of them. A system of this nature will not only make drivers more aware of their environment but could also encourage better observation. Once hearing the warning drivers will hopefully look in their mirrors to assess the situation.
One way to improve the safety of LHD HGV drivers is through road engineering; HGV’s could be prohibited from using roads in suburban areas. Or alternatively, HGV’s could be segregated during different times of the day. During quieter periods of the day HGV’s could be permitted to use bus lanes or during rush hours main arterial roads could be closed to HGV’s. Segregating LHD HGV’s could reduce the level of contact between them and other road users and could hopefully produce a safer road environment.
To tackle the varying degrees of driver experience the UK could require HGV drivers to pass a test or take further training before they are eligible to drive in Britain. While this is perhaps the most effective means of acquainting foreign drivers with British road laws and behaviour it is perhaps unpractical. The cost and time that haulers would have to devote to this might discourage them from taking the test, harming imports and exports. Also it might contravene EU laws on freedom of movement and trade.
British authorities and road safety groups, unlike other EU states, do have one opportunity to provide limited education to LHD HGV drivers. The geographic position of Britain means that only a limited number of drivers can enter and for a short time they make a captive audience. It is possible that limited information, such as speed limits and reminders about blind spots, can be communicated to HGV drivers while crossing the channel. The distribution of 40,000 Fresnel lenses, in envelopes with five languages printed on them, at French ports offers a precedent for this. Working in partnership with haulage companies can increase the effectiveness of this measure. No other EU country has this advantage because drivers can cross their borders quickly by land.
Changes to the current endorsement policy, as a result of the Road Safety Act 2006, have for the first time given UK agencies the ability to fine foreign drivers for driving offences in the UK. The changes however do not amount to any form of international cooperation on driving disqualifications and the UK is still unable to seek prosecution across national boundaries.
Establishing a deposit scheme, similar to those already in operation in some European states, may enable UK agencies to prosecute LHD HGV drivers with greater ease. This scheme would enable law enforcement agencies to treat all road users equally. Instead of waiting to issue an intended notice of prosecution Police officers would have the power to take payment for traffic violations at the roadside. This payment would equal the price of the relevant fine for the violation. If at a latter date the driver is found innocent the deposit is returned to them at their country of origin. This would enable the Police to enforce the law more effectively, keep detailed records of LHD HGV’s and their drivers and make drivers take responsibility for their actions.
European law enforcement agencies could adopt a more co-ordinated approach. British Police could contact the driver’s native country notifying them of a breach of traffic law. The prosecution could then be carried out by or with the support of local police. Enforcement could be made easier by the introduction of a central European database. This database would enable all enforcement agencies to have a complete record of a driver’s licence; records would be easily available of any past offences, points on the licence or any bans that are currently in place. Currently British law enforcement agencies do not have access to this information and drivers that are banned in one country can still drive in another. Running a database of this size and nature may be too expensive or cumbersome. However, a network that allows the quick and efficient exchange of information is certainly required to assist in tracking and prosecuting international HGV drivers.
To tackle the issue effectively a balanced approach must be adopted; the British public must be educated on the dangers of LHD HGV’s and how to avoid placing themselves in dangerous situations. Through responsible reporting the media, road safety groups and the government can run campaigns to inform the British public of the increase in LHD HGV’s on Britain’s roads. These campaigns can then be used to offer effective advice on the safest way to approach the problem, for example not to linger next to a LHD HGV. The dangers of LHD HGV’s could also be built into the driving theory test to ensure all new drivers have an understanding of the dangers and how they can limit them.
Recommendations
The increasing number of LHD HGV’s on Britain’s roads has led to groups questioning how best to deal with the situation. Crash statistics are limited and perhaps do not reflect the full picture. Driving offence rates among overseas drivers are certainly higher than among UK drivers. VOSA found that drivers’ hour’s offences are detected in 3.7% of UK drivers, but this rises to 12.8% for overseas drivers (2). From this evidence it would appear that overseas drivers are more susceptible to illegal, and possibly dangerous, driving.
There are numerous safety concerns to be considered when dealing with overseas HGV drivers. The most prominent safety concern is the susceptibility to blind spots. The biggest blind spot, because of the steering wheel position, for a LHD HGV is the far side. This is especially dangerous when pulling out into the middle or outside lane; drivers need to be certain the lane next to them is clear. There are also issues of driver behaviour. Overseas drivers may lack the required experience and knowledge to drive on Britain’s roads. Britain’s road environment is obviously different to the rest of Europe; overseas drivers may not know how to drive safely on the left hand side. It is also possible that overseas drivers do not have sufficient knowledge of British traffic law making them unsafe on the roads. This could be further compounded by Europe’s use of the metric system; drivers will need to know how to convert to the imperial system in order to calculate distance and speed. Lack of experience and knowledge can combine to confuse the driver leading to dangerous or inappropriate manoeuvres.
LHD HGV’s may also pose a danger on Britain’s roads because of the variation of maintenance laws across Europe. Britain has stringent laws on maintenance but other European countries do not require the same extensive and regular testing experienced in Britain. The lack of a co-ordinated European wide response to road law is manifest in other areas. British law enforcement agencies are unable to prosecute foreign drivers because they cannot follow the drivers across borders. Furthermore without a central European database driver’s can offend, or even be banned, in one country and continue to drive undetected in another.
The solution to the issues above lie in creating a policy that tackles direct safety issues, driver behaviour and is co-ordinated across Europe. To make LHD HGV’s suitable for British roads changes need to be made to the vehicle itself. In the Road Safety Act 2006, the government required that all new trucks must be fitted with Class V mirrors. The aim of this stipulation was to improve driver visibility on the far side. However, this change will not completely solve the situation, as it makes no provision for changes to older HGVs. It must be coupled with other roads safety measures. The DfT is also running tests on window lenses that magnify the side view to give improved visibility in that area. The results of this study will be released in spring 2007.
There are also more sophisticated technologies available to assist LHD HGV drivers. Cameras can be fitted in place of, or as well as mirrors to provide drivers with an all round view of the road. The measure may be too expensive for smaller or independent haulers to afford and is still susceptible to a lack of driver care. The use of sensors may also be useful in alerting drivers to more vulnerable road users around them. Similar to the sensors on cars for reversing these could be fitted to HGV’s to give drivers a more informed view of the road around them. One system that is already on the market omits sound warning vulnerable road users an HGV is about to turn. This could lead to arrogant driving as HGV drivers come to expect others to move once the sound has been heard.
Road safety groups also need to work on driver behaviour in order to effect a long term and sustainable change to driving standards. It is unreasonable to expect HGV drivers to take specific training for UK roads but drivers do make a captive audience when entering Britain. It is possible to give overseas drivers simple information, such as speed limits, while they cross over into Britain. This limited approach to educating drivers will have little effect on its own but it can be integral as part of a wider strategy. British drivers should also receive some education on the dangers of LHD HGV’s. This could be built into the theory test for learners while more experienced drivers could be targeted through a nationwide publicity campaign. British drivers need to be taught the safest means of approaching, passing or being past by LHD HGV’s.
Overseas HGV drivers can be encouraged to change their behaviour by altering the endorsement system to enable overseas drivers to be prosecuted. The government has reacted to this in someway by enabling British law enforcement agencies to prosecute foreign drivers in the UK and by establishing a cooperation agreement with Ireland. Another means of altering driver behaviour and making them accountable for their behaviour is establishing a deposit scheme as run by other European states. Under this system the Police are given the power to collect money for driving offences at the roadside. The money is later returned if the driver is found innocent. Giving law enforcement agencies the ability to charge and prosecute overseas HGV drivers will make them more accountable for their actions.
The lack of a co-ordinated policy to foreign drivers across Europe also undermines road safety. Vehicle maintenance is one area that could benefit from a co-ordinated approach as standards vary across the continent. Britain has more stringent maintenance requirements than many other European states. One result of this is that vehicles that would fail British tests are still able to drive on British roads because they have passed in their native country. By adopting a co-ordinated M.O.T safety standards are assured throughout Europe. However, Britain should ensure that it’s own safety standards are not negated by those states with less stringent testing, who will be battling to keep costs down for their own haulers by keeping standards close to those already in place.
Increased communication and co-ordination between European law enforcement agencies will also improve road safety as drivers know any offences can follow them across state borders. By establishing a central database of driving offences law enforcement groups have easy access to a driver’s history. Currently a driver can be banned in one country and still drive in another, as European police forces do not communicate on this issue. European law enforcement agencies must be willing and able to share information quickly and efficiently to ensure that dangerous drivers are kept off the roads.
To tackle the issue of left-hand drive HGV drivers on Britain’s roads requires a three-pronged strategy. Legislation must be past to ensure that all HGV drivers are utilising the safety equipment available. Both overseas and British drivers need to be educated on how to use the road network safely together. While European members need to adopt a more co-ordinated approach to vehicle testing, exchange of information and prosecution of dangerous drivers.
1) Survey of Foreign Vehicle Activity in GB – 2003, (Department for Transport, 2003)
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/freight/foreignvehicle/surveyofforeignvehicleactivi5131?version=1
2) £3bn Free Ride for Foreign Trucks on UK Roads, (Road Haulage Association, 31 October 2005)
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=619
3) Parliamentary Questions. 27th November 2006.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm061127/text/06112730000016
4) Road Safety Bill Note 6: Foreign Drivers, (Department for Transport, 2005)
http://www.brake.org.uk/index.php?p=619
5) Retrofitting of devices for indirect vision (mirrors) on existing goods vehicles.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/open/retrofittingdevicesmirrors/consultationletter?page=1
6) VOSA/HA Press Release. 7th December 2006.
7) http://www.lisa2alert.com/en/home.htm
8) Road Safety Bill 2005: Briefing Notes.
http://www.ltpnetwork.gov.uk/Documents/Document/road%20safety%20bill%20summary.pdf
9) UK Commission for Integrated Transport.
http://www.cfit.gov.uk/docs/2002/44tonne/44tonne/final/05.htm
10) DfT Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/consultations/open/retrofittingdevicesmirrors/pria
|
RoSPA is a registered charity: Registered Charity No: 207823 Patron: Her Majesty the Queen RoSPA Head Office: Edgbaston Park, 353 Bristol Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham B5 7ST, UK |
 |