Many van drivers just assume that the speed limits for their vans are the same as for a private car. In many cases, particularly for smaller vans, they may be right, but for anything bigger than a small van they’re wrong.

The maximum speed limits for all goods vehicles of 3500kg and less, unless lower limits are indicated by signs, is 70mph for motorways, 60mph for dual-carriageways and 50mph for single-carriageway roads. The only exemption is for ‘car-derived vans’ with a maximum loaded weight (GVW) of 2000kg or less, to which the speed limits for cars apply (70, 70, 60).

For many years it seems that the police have interpreted ‘car-derived van’ as meaning any small van with a GVW of 2,000kg or less. This would include many of the vans typically driven by same day couriers, vans like the Escort, Courier, Berlingo/Partner, some Doblos, Combo, Nemo/Bipper/Fiorino, Kangoo, as well as some of the more obvious ‘car shaped’ vans like the Astravan, Fiesta, Corsa and Punto.

In December 2007 the Department for Transport (DfT) issued a document ‘Clarification of national speed limits for vans‘ which I actually ignored at the time because I could only find paraphrased reports of the document rather than the actual document itself. Anyway, I forgot all about it until I stumbled on it this morning while googling for something else. I have to say I’m astonished at how unclear the clarification is and even more astonished at the way they seem to be interpreting the law. Here’s the important bit:

“Q.  Are there any exemptions from these lower speed limits for vans?

A. There is one (small) group of vans which have the same speed limits are cars by virtue of the definitions in Schedule 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act of 1984.  These are vans that are both derived from a car chassis and also have a maximum laden weight of no more than 2 tonnes.  This means that the weight of the vehicle and the payload it is designed to be able to carry when added together do not exceed 2 tonnes.  The van design must be a derivative of a car body, it is not sufficient that it looks similar to a particular car.

Q.  Which vans meet the criteria to be considered car derived vans for speed limit purposes?

A. Very few vans will meet the criteria to benefit from the same speed limits as a car.  Those that do are likely to be similar to a Ford Fiesta van, Vauxhall Corsa or Renault Clio van in having maximum payloads of around 500kgs so that when combined with the weight of the vehicle unladen (normally around 1.4 tonnes) the maximum laden weight of the whole vehicle will not exceed 2 tonnes.

What this means is that vans such as the Ford Transit and (and of course the larger panel vans) will not meet the definition of car derived vans set out set out in part IV section 2 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.  Therefore these vehicles will be subject to speed limits of 50mph on single carriageways and 60 mph on dual carriageways.“

This guidance seems to ignore the very type of vehicle over which there is the most confusion, namely the type of van with a ‘car’ front end and a ‘box’ grafted onto the back. Vans in this class would include the Vauxhall Combo, Citroen Berlingo, Peugeot Partner, Renault Kangoo, Citroen Nemo etc., all of which have a maximum laden weight of under 2 tonnes.

Part IV Section 2 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 states defines a car-derived van as “a goods vehicle which is constructed or adapted as a derivative of a passenger vehicle and which has a maximum laden weight not exceeding 2 tonnes;”. This definition makes no mention of the chassis or the body shape.

To use my examples of vans above; the Vauxhall Combo is clearly a derivative of the Vauxhall Corsa car, albeit with a different chassis and body shape, and could also be said to be ‘based on’ the Vauxhall Combo Kombi – a version of the Vauxhall Combo with rear seats and windows. Arguably the Kombi is based on the van rather than vice versa, but the fact remains that Kombi is a passenger car and shares its body shape and chassis with the van. Similarly the other vans mentioned, although not based on any passenger car, all have an ‘estate car’ (or ‘window van’ if you prefer) version – the Citroen Berlingo Multispace, Peugeot Partner Combi, Renault Kangoo MPV – with the exception of the Citroen Nemo which is the lightest, newest and most car-like to drive of the vans mentioned but does not yet have a ‘windowed’ version.

According to the DfT guidance the Combo, Berlingo, Partner and Kangoo, may possibly be classed as car-derived vans, depending on the importance placed on there being a near-identical passenger version available, while the smaller Citroen Nemo is subject to same speed limits as a 3,500kg Mercedes Sprinter, at least until a ‘car’ version of it becomes available.

This situation is clearly extremely confusing, particularly as the clarification neatly ducks the issue of classifying this particular type of vehicle, instead only mentioning larger and smaller sizes. More confusion is added because these vehicles are actually classified as car-derived vans on their V5 ‘log books’.

I’ve emailed the DfT for some clarification on this and if I don’t receive confirmation that ‘car-derived van’ on the log book means that car speed limits apply I’ll be contacting our local police and maybe ACPO for confirmation of how they interpret the law.

The article quotes Duncan Coleman of vansunited.co.uk as saying “We’ve not only seen retailers and manufacturers reduce their new and used prices, but they’ve applied finance offers to LCVs that were once the preserve of the car market. Now is the perfect time to buy for those businesses wanting to secure a strong deal.”

I suppose if you’re set on buying a new van in the next year or so then now might be the time to do it, but I’d question whether this is really the perfect time to buy.

While the last six weeks or so have been encouragingly busy for many same day couriers there’s no certainty about the future at all. Whether we’re on the brink of a cataclysmic recession or not it’s clear that many companies aren’t in a position to last the next few months, never mind considering investment in new vehicles.

There are many bargains to be had at auctions at the moment, nearly new vans being auctioned of by liquidators and the hire fleets getting rid of the excess vehicles caused by the slowdown in the construction and transport industries, but the simple fact is that there are more vans available than there are buyers.

I think that the only silver lining, from the perspective of a van dealer, may be transport companies taking the opportunity to replace some of their less efficient vehicles with newer models with better fuel consumption. That’s likely to be bad news for Mercedes with their heavy, thirsty, new shape Sprinter, but good news for Peugeot/Citroen & Fiat with their incredibly efficient little Bipper/Nemo/Fiorino van and for Vauxhall, Renault & Nissan with the almost unbelievably frugal Vivaro/Primastar/Traffic range.

On the whole though I suspect it will be the likes of Norflex, TLS & Reflex that will be the real beneficiaries of the cheap vehicles available at the moment. With high mileage couriers keen to own the newest and most fuel-efficient vehicles, but either unwilling to commit to long leases or unable to arrange finance on good terms, the flexible long-term rental option should quite rightly be seen by many operators as the most appropriate form of vehicle acquisition over the next few years. It would be very brave, if not foolish, to tie up funds by purchasing vehicles, or to commit to a three or four year finance deal, in the current economic environment.

These claims seem to be based on recent decisions by the likes of TNT to make ‘significant’ purchases of vehicles from Smith Electric Vehicles www.smithelectricvehicles.com. While this is an encouraging step forward I think that TNT’s claim to be running “world’s largest zero emissions fleet” needs to be put in perspective. By November 2009 TNT will have acquired 150 7.5-tonne electric vehicles for use in the UK, that’s much less than 10% of their fleet – without taking into consideration the thousands of vans and trucks operated in TNT livery by their subcontractors.

By TNT’s own claims the limited range of these electric trucks (100-150 miles between charges) would allow them to replace a maximum of 200 trucks out of their UK fleet with the electric powered vehicles, unless battery technology improves significantly. The express parcels division of TNT UK operates from over 60 depots in the UK, so even without taking the numerous other TNT UK locations and operations into account it’s clear that these electric vehicles will carry out a tiny proportion of TNT’s UK work, and only the low mileage, and therefore least polluting, local operations at that – so it’s hardly likely to have a significant impact on their carbon footprint. As for TNT running “world’s largest zero emissions fleet”, maybe they don’t have milkmen in Atherstone but a quick call to their contacts at Smith Electric Vehicles would confirm that Smith’s are responsible for the maintenance of Dairy Crests fleet of over 2,000 electric milk floats.

Unless battery technology improves significantly electric light commercial vehicles will always be limited to extremely local operations with a predictable daily mileage of 100 miles or less. While that might be useful for milk rounds, florists, some postal deliveries and local multidrops in city centres it’s almost entirely useless for the same-day courier industry, except possibly on some local London circuits and some local in-house mail runs.

And the ‘cost savings’ from running an electric van compared to a diesel? Well the electricity cost of running the 7.5t vehicles that TNT are using is apparently only 7p/mile, compared with 42p/mile compared with a diesel truck, which certainly sounds like a substantial saving. It has to be remembered though that these vehicles will only be used on the shortest of runs – with a quoted range of 100-150 miles under ideal conditions, presumably without radios, data terminals, headlights, windscreen wipers, heater (do they have heaters?) etc draining the battery, I’d be concerned about running one of these for more than say 80 miles per day. That’s a potential saving of £28 per day in fuel costs.

The trucks are exempt from London Congestion Charge and Road Fund Licence and apparently cost less to maintain than a diesel vehicle and have the added benefit of not requiring an operator’s licence, so there seems to be a lot in their favour. The initial purchase price does seem to be a bit steep though.

Smith Electric vehicles don’t seem to publish any prices on their website but TNT’s recent press release quotes a £7m investment involved in the purchase of 100 vehicles. That’s £70,000 each for a vehicle which is likely to do less than 125,000 miles over the next 5 years.

The upshot seems to be that if you’re keen on reducing your carbon footprint (or just adding a bit of ‘greenwash’ to your business), if you have vehicles in your fleet that consistently travel less than 100 miles a day and you’re either cash rich or willing to sign up to a 5-7 year lease agreement then electric vehicles certainly seem to be an attractive proposition. For the rest of us in the transport industry our contribution to cutting our carbon footprints will have to rely for now on reducing fuel consumption and maximising our vehicle utilisation.

The system, known as VIPER, involves weight sensors actually embedded within the road surface (known as WIMS – Weigh-In Motion System) which measure the weight of each axle going over them to within 5% accuracy. The vehicle details are checked using ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) and the VOSA operative in front of his computer immediately takes the decision whether to request that the vehicle’s stopped and brought in for accurate weighing at the VOSA weighbridge.

During the trials of the system from June 2004 to December 2005 VOSA reported a 700% improvement in the accuracy of their vehicle stops for suspected overloading. Out of 434 vehicles identified by the system as being overweight, 379 were found to be actually overweight. Since the trials they have improved on their operating procedures and now report an almost 100% record in stopping overloaded vehicles.

There are apparently already 14 of these VIPER sites in use throughout the country and there are plans to introduce many more. Other than there being one on the M6 at Birmingham and the fact that VOSA have stated that there will be a “particular focus on port traffic” there seem to be few clues to exactly where these sites are located.

The bad news for couriers and other van drivers is that VOSA are actively targeting enforcement on light commercial vehicles because overloading is so common, particularly in the 3,500kg GVW range – overloaded Sprinter vans in other words.

So what can you do to avoid being caught breaking the law?

• Know exactly what weight your van can carry. Take your fully fuelled van, along with your maps, sack truck, ropes, straps and all the paraphernalia you carry, along to your local weighbridge and have it weighed (with you in it). Subtract that weight from the GVW of your van and the result is the weight you can legally carry.

• Know how heavy your load is. Don’t just take the customer’s word for it – if they’re wrong it will be you that’s prosecuted, not them. Many customers will give you the weight of the product rather than the weight of the product including containers and pallets. If you think you may be overloaded then drive to the nearest weighbridge to check your weight – you can’t be prosecuted for being overloaded if you’re on the way to the nearest weighbridge.

• Distribute your load evenly. You can be prosecuted for overloading individual axles as well as for being over your maximum allowed weight. Adjust your load so that the van sits evenly. If you’re driving along with the nose of the van pointing into the air then you probably need to shift some weight forward.

• Consider some sort of on-board weighing equipment – http://www.axtec.co.uk/On-board.htm for example, there are many other manufacturers.

So – Do I Need a Licence to be a Courier?

In the UK there are is no special licence required to operate as a courier. You’ll need a full driving licence of course if you want to drive a van, car or motorbike. You could ride a motor bike on a provisional licence but you’d be limited to 125cc bikes which are of very limited use in the courier industry; you’ll also struggle to get proper courier insurance on a provisional licence.

Your normal full driving licence will allow you to drive vans up to 3,500 kg GVW (Gross Vehicle Weight – the maximum allowed loaded vehicle weight). This would include most large Sprinters/Transits/Ducatos etc but not the biggest 3,500kg+ models in the ranges – these larger vehicles are very rare in the courier industry though.

If you passed your Category B (normal car) test before 1st January 1997 you should also have Category C1 (vehicles up to 7.5 tonnes) entitlement and Category B+E (vehicle and trailer) entitlement. If you passed your test after 1st January 1997 you’ll need to take an extra test if you want to drive vehicles over 3,500kg or a van towing a trailer over 750kg.

If you intend to operate a vehicle over 3,500kg you’ll also need an Operator’s Licence (known as an ‘O Licence’) which is much to complicated an issue to cover here. See the Transport Office website for more details.

Depending on your circumstances you may need permission from the local council, your landlord or your freeholder to park a van at your house, these requirements are quite rare though.

Courier Insurance

If you’re just thinking about getting into the courier business your next step should be to consider insurance. Motor Insurance, Goods In Transit Insurance and Public Liability Insurance are a major start-up expense.

Motor insurance which covers you for the “carriage of goods for hire or reward” is essential – and is a legal requirement.

Goods In Transit insurance covers the goods you’re carrying against loss, theft or damage. This isn’t a legal requirement but it’s sensible and some customers, particularly other transport companies, will insist on you having it.

Public Liability insurance insures you against claims from customers or members of the public for damage or injury that might be caused by your actions. Examples of this would be dropping a box on someone’s foot or knocking a computer of someone’s desk while you’re delivering.

Avoid buying fuel (or anything) at motorway services. If you’re caught short for fuel (or anything else) try Cheap Fuel Near Motorway Junctions for conveniently positioned fuel and supermarket sites.

Check your tyre pressures regularly. You’re meant to do this every day for the sake of safety of course. You’re normally meant to increase your tyre pressures slightly when carrying heavy loads and when driving at motorway speeds for long periods. Check your van’s handbook for the manufacturer’s recommendations. Think how much harder it is to pedal a bike with flat tyres than with well inflated tyres.

Close your windows on the motorway. Apparently an open window at 70mph can increase your fuel consumption by nearly 10%.

Drive smoothly. Change up early, don’t race away from the lights in low gears, read the road ahead of you and try to avoid coming to a stop. Keeping the van moving slowly is far more economical than stop-start driving.

Lose weight. Every bit of extra weight you carry around with you is costing you money. Even carrying a 25 litre jerry can of fuel with you can increase your fuel consumption by 1%. How much of the rubbish you carry around in your van do you really need?

Slow down. Cruising at 80mph rather than 70mph will gain you less than 11 minutes on a 100 mile journey but can increase your fuel consumption by up to 25%. Sometimes every second counts but often arriving 10 minutes later is no great problem. If you have to stop to fuel up because of your excessive fuel consumption then you’ll lose all the time you gained by speeding anyway.

Switch off unnecessary electrical equipment. The electricity in your battery isn’t just a free by-product of your engine turning. The more electricity used by headlights, heated windows, TVs etc, the more fuel you’ll use. Charging your mobile and laptop at home costs you less than charging them in your van (unplug the adapters when you’ve finished though).

Maintain your vehicle properly. This is part of the job anyway but it can make a big difference to fuel consumption. In particular make sure that your air filter is changed at least as often as recommended by the manufacturer. Ensure that the correct grade of oil is used in the engine, maybe consider using a synthetic oil even if it’s not specified by the manufacturer. 10,000 miles at 41mpg costs around £20 less than at 40mpg so even a slight improvement would make the extra cost of the oil worthwhile.

Don’t overfill your tank. This causes frothing, spillages and leaks through the vent pipe, costing you money and leaving dangerous diesel spills on the road. Forcing that extra 5 litres into the tank may lose you 10p worth into thin air and will certainly add almost 5kg onto the weight of your van. I also my suspicions about the accuracy of the fuel pump when ‘trickle filling’ or ‘brimming’ your tank.

Choose where and when you fuel up. Try to plan your route home so that you can fuel up at a reasonably priced filling station of your choice, without adding extra miles onto your journey. Every extra mile you add to your journey could add between 12p and 23p to your costs, depending on your fuel consumption. A 3 mile each way (6 miles) detour off the motorway to save 2p/litre could cost you up to £1.38 in fuel alone in a large van. Fuelling up on your way home, or on your slack journeys, helps prevent you from having to stop for fuel at expensive motorway services while you’re on a rush job.

The Driver CPC is in no way connected with the Operator’s CPC required by Transport Managers etc to become an O Licence holder.

This is guidance for the Driver CPC as it applies to GOODS VEHICLE DRIVERS ONLY. The rules for PCV drivers will be implemented on earlier dates.

The requirement to hold a valid Driver CPC will eventually apply to all drivers of goods vehicles over 3500 kg GVW – so all drivers driving vehicles that require C1, C1+E, C or C+E licences.

All new drivers passing their tests to driver vehicles over 3500 kg after 10th September 2009 will have to obtain an initial Driver CPC qualification in addition to passing the appropriate driving test. The Driver CPC will need to be renewed every 5 years by completing a 35 hour course.

Drivers who have already have C1, C1+E, C or C+E licences before 10th September 2009 will not have to obtain an initial Driver CPC qualification but will still have to undertake 35 hours of training to renew their periodic Driver CPC by September 2014 and every 5 years after that.

Drivers of vehicles driven under B+E licences (van and trailer combinations) do not require a Driver CPC irrespective of the Gross Train Weight

There’s a VERY slim chance that the truckers will get their rebate (which will be bad news for us) but I can’t see that there’s any chance whatsoever that it would be extended to van operators.

The government are even refusing ‘essential user rebates’ to the Police, the NHS, the Fire Service and local authorities. That will result in a budget deficit for these genuinely ‘essential users’ and huge council tax increases for us next year – more importantly though, if the NHS aren’t getting a rebate for shifting sick people to A&E are we likely to get one for shifting some worthless junk around the country?

I could easily be wrong about this, but if it’s giving this much hassle it’s got to be worth getting some proper legal advice.
 

I think you’ve got your answer right there then. Unless (and I’m not actually suggesting that you would do this) you and the subcontractor mutually decided to ‘turn a blind eye’ to the fact that he would be a few kg over, or if you misled the subcontractor about the weight, then it’s entirely his fault and the costs are legally and morally his responsibility.
 

someone wrote:The only people to object to sign writing are other couriers you sub from when they are paranoid or terrified your going to try n nick their customers

As I’ve said before when this topic is raised, I’ve always had sign written vans.
1) Its my/our business and I’ll promote it as I want.
2) More professional appearence, especially when you/your driver wears a matching uniform
3) Less hassel and more leniency from Police, Traffic Warden & Security Guards when tipping/parked on double yellows etc!

Do a search for the last time this came up and the majority went WITH the sign writing!

1) I think the only people that notice are other couriers
2) Only your own customer would notice anyway and just the uniform would create the same impression, as would a clean white shirt, a tie (clip-on for H&S reasons ), polished boots and just ‘clean’ overalls.
3) I agree 100%. How about ‘generic’ signwriting though? Express Sameday Courier – no logos, no phone numbers. That way you don’t get the bad driving complaints or the fake insurance claims either.

I don’t care much either way myself. Given the choice of a plain van or a company liveried van for some jobs the plain van might influence the choice under certain circumstances. I know that many other companies are strongly against their subcontractors having liveried vans though.

LWB Connect is just about a Midi van, Dispatch/Scudo is a Midi, Vito is borderline Midi/Transit, Traffic is borderline Transit/Midi.

If you’ve got a van smaller than a Berlingo (Fiesta/Astra) then check what the goods are before putting your bid in.

Your satnav is probably more likely to show closer to your real speed.

Neither is likely to be 100% accurate, although the Satnav should be much more accurate most of the time – particularly on level ground.
 

And while I’m on the subject, if anyone’s got a recent V5 for a Berlingo/Combo etc sized van, are they described as ‘car derived van’ or ‘panel van’ or something else?