I have read somewhere, along time ago that you should as premises controller come to an agreement with the drivers' employer regarding welfare provision.

Search Visiting Drivers - there was a discussion back in August 2014

Why I shouldn't provide anything other than access to the toilet for external drivers: 1) Cost of providing facilities 2) Cost of maintaining facilities 3) Abuse of provided facilities 4) Control of safe access/egress to facilities 5) Security issues 6) Potential liability (slips, trips, falls, legionella, food poisoning, scalding..) Controversial - probably, however: Does your company specifically provide more for the UPS/ParcelForce/Yodel/Whistl/Post Office etc. drivers and courriers who attend your site? Why do construction contractors (generally on site for the full day) so often get excluded from all site facilities and have to provide their own welfare arrangements?

Afraid this is just guidance, not the regs as such. It is the employer duty to provide (regulations), )which could be done by liaising / negotiating with clients for their visiting drivers to use facilities, or maybe not). The person in control of the visited site only has legal responsibility for their own employees. Unfortunately lots of HSE publications use this sort of vague phrasing in the guidance (which of course is the most readable text), but don't actually have any legal backup - "have a duty" does not link to any particular regulation, especially in this case.

So I would presume from some comments that those who are consultants are also excluded from using the "facilities" of the organisations employing them, and that some are not? I'm not going to take sides, just to state my opinion & what I do as a transient worker. I use the customers facilities, if they then try to stop me, I simply pack up and leave, never to return. I generally use the facilities immediately upon arrival. I have never been refused. If they try to stop me from leaving then I would be looking at accusing them of false imprisonment. Whether I could, would get away with it, or not, I would do that. I see it as an insult and a breach of basic human rights to be refused use of toilet facilities. As far as providing other amenities, I would expect use of vending machines, if present, use of a canteen area to consume food & drinks, or another place suitable, however, I would only be looking for showers in an emergency scenario if they were present on site. Mind, some of the places I have been, I would not want to use the facilities a second time, not being able to wash after using them is a bit of an issue for me! At the time, I was also engaged by that client to undertake practical mechanical engineering works on machinery, which resulted in getting dirty, and no where to wash, even though the official agreement with the customer was use of their facilities, which we had, just that the facilities were not up to scratch. This became a common theme with many clients of the same type that we were dealing with at the time < 10 years ago, so we then arranged to carry washing materials etc. only relying on the client to provide running water & toilet facilities. That contract didn't last long, they saw the facilities as OK, we didn't, we didn't try to win the contract when it came up for renewal and they wanted a cost down!

Distribution centres as far as i know