Rank: Forum user 
|
What penalties are you looking at for forwarding freight that has been brought in as ADR but having changed the paperwork to read non ADR when forwarding it back out, but with markings still on the freight. I know this has been happening, but can not produce evidence to show which staff member has been carrying it out. So want to make sure the directors and managers are aware of the consequences.
I have seen the penalties for the hauliers we are using but would the penalties for the office staff come more under HSE investigation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
When a load is stopped and the driver is found not to be correctly ADR trained in an unsuitable vehicle the authorities will follow the paper trail (you can bet a normal freight/pallet forwarder will fully co-operate with any investigation so as to preserve their licence to operate). Read the current sentencing guidelines (Feb 2016) - deliberate/uncontrolled acts carry significantly stiffer penalties.
Remember these new guidelines consider the potential for harm, not the actuall harm when a sentenec is being determined.
|
 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
When a load is stopped and the driver is found not to be correctly ADR trained in an unsuitable vehicle the authorities will follow the paper trail (you can bet a normal freight/pallet forwarder will fully co-operate with any investigation so as to preserve their licence to operate). Read the current sentencing guidelines (Feb 2016) - deliberate/uncontrolled acts carry significantly stiffer penalties.
Remember these new guidelines consider the potential for harm, not the actuall harm when a sentenec is being determined.
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user 
|
This is not as clear cut as you may think. We manufacture paint (nail varnish) which may or may not be covered under ADR, depending upon the quantity being shipped. The regulations have guidelines on the quantities, for us its anything over 8 tonnes (In bottles). so if you are breaking down loads into smaller quantity it may be ok.
We have had a few subcontracted hauliers who have (wrongly) refused to take the goods due to interpretations of the regulations and we have had to both bear the cost of return and/or the customer complaints due to late arrival.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The OP refered to a load arriving and then being shipped back out - there was no clarification if any "work" was conducted e.g. decanting from 205 Ltr drum to retail packaging subject to example LQ / EQ exemption. Only during "work" could the pre-existing labelling potentially change and in consequence the supporting paperwork may then be legitimately altered. Seen similar issues about interpretation which resulted in package quantity variant SDS being prepared - one for bulk subject to transport provisions (Section 14 fully populated) and one for retail with an explanation of the exemption being applied in Section 14. http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2017/17contentse0.html
Based on the relevant UN Number of the product you can see if transported quantity change would impact labelling and paperwork (perhaps it is not the paperwork at fault but that someone is not re-labelling as they should?)
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
The OP refered to a load arriving and then being shipped back out - there was no clarification if any "work" was conducted e.g. decanting from 205 Ltr drum to retail packaging subject to example LQ / EQ exemption. Only during "work" could the pre-existing labelling potentially change and in consequence the supporting paperwork may then be legitimately altered. Seen similar issues about interpretation which resulted in package quantity variant SDS being prepared - one for bulk subject to transport provisions (Section 14 fully populated) and one for retail with an explanation of the exemption being applied in Section 14. http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/adr/adr2017/17contentse0.html
Based on the relevant UN Number of the product you can see if transported quantity change would impact labelling and paperwork (perhaps it is not the paperwork at fault but that someone is not re-labelling as they should?)
|
2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Hi thanks for your replies, It is not a LQ issue, just that possibly distrubtion have knownly removed hazardous details from the paperwork so they can forward as non adr. Proving this is another issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Snwdrp84 one thing not to be forgotten is that DVSA (VOSA) also have the powers when it comes to transport of dangerous goods and they may refer it to the Traffic Commissioner for their rulling against the companies operators licence and the driver.
|
1 user thanked Martin Gray for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.