Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

HGV firms given 12 months to make lorries safer for London cyclists – or face fines

Direct Vision Standard to eliminate blind spots comes into force on 26 October 2020

Businesses operating HGVs in London have been given a year to make their lorries safer for the capital’s cyclists – or face being fined for vehicles found to be non-compliant with the new standards.

The requirements, introduced by Mayor Sadiq Khan alongside Transport for London (TfL) and London Councils, which represents the cities local authorities, mean vehicles  of 12 tonnes and over will have to adhere to a Direct Vision Standard to help minimise drivers’ blind spots.

Operators that fail to comply, or do nott introduce other safety features, will be subject to a fine of £550 under the new requirements, described as a world first.

Despite accounting for just 4 per cent of London’s traffic on an annual mileage basis, lorries are involved in a disproportionate number of collisions involving vulnerable road users – between 2015 and 2017, they accounted for 63 per cent of cyclist fatalities, and 25 per cent of fatal incidents in which a pedestrian was the victim.

Eliminating the most dangerous lorries from the capital’s streets is therefore a key part of Khan’s Vision Zero strategy of eliminating all road deaths by 2041, and this week operators can apply for free HGV Safety Permits ahead of the enforcement starting on 26 October 2020.

The new standards will apply to vehicles of 12 tonnes or more and be implemented across Greater London on a 24/7 basis.

The Direct Vision Standard will rate vehicles on a scale of zero (lowest) to 5 (highest) stars depending on how much the driver can see from the cab.

When it comes into force, zero-rated vehicles will be banned from London’s streets, unless equipped with ‘Safe System’ features such as being equipped with CCTV monitoring, audible alerts when they turn left and cyclist detection sensors to enable HGV Safety Permits to be issued.

The requirements will become increasingly tighter between 2020 and 2024, when only vehicles with a three-star or above rating will be allowed in the capital.

Launching the initiative today at CEMEX’s Stepney Concrete Plant, Khan said: “I’m proud of our world-leading plans to remove the most dangerous lorries from London’s streets. So many of the tragic deaths on our roads involve HGVs and this new scheme will help save lives.

 “Forward-looking businesses have already been choosing safer vehicles in the run up to HGV safety permits becoming available. Today the scheme has gone live and operators now have 12 months to upgrade their fleets, helping make our streets much safer for people walking and cycling.”

CEMEX says that all of its vehicles in London will comply with or exceed the minimum Direct Vision Standards in force until 2024 and David Hart, the company’s supply chain director for the UK said:  “We were honoured to welcome Sadiq Khan and the TfL team to our Stepney site today, as the Direct Vision Standard is launched.

“DVS is a landmark scheme that will ensure that all road users and pedestrians are safe as they come across HGVs while moving around the city. We fully support the programme; safety is CEMEX’s number one priority and informs all aspects of our operation.

“We are committed to investing in, and developing, our fleet so that it continues to reflect the latest advancements in safety features.”

The initiative has been welcomed by road safety campaigners. Victoria Lebrec, campaign co-ordinator at national road crash victims’ charity RoadPeace, said: “I lost my leg in a crash with a lorry in 2014 because the driver didn’t see me.

“Since then there have been many people killed and even more seriously injured because the lorries currently driving on London roads are not fit for purpose.

“It is madness to have huge, heavy vehicles with poor visibility on roads that are filled with people,” she continued.

“Transport for London should be commended for their Safety Permit scheme. I look forward to October 2020 when the most dangerous vehicles will be off the roads – and in the meantime encourage operators to consider thinking ahead, and making their vehicles five stars.”

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

14 comments

Avatar
quiff | 5 years ago
2 likes

CyclingInBeastMode - the article could be clearer on this, but it's a £550 fine for driving a 12+tonne vehicle in Greater London without a permit (albeit reduced by 50% for prompt payment). So yes enforcement is key, but in theory an operator with a number of non-compliant vehicles could be getting multiple £550 fines every day. I assume automatic enforcement will also be possible using ANPR, as with the congestion and emissions charges.  

Avatar
CyclingInBeastMode | 5 years ago
0 likes

Surely it'll as always be down to enforcement, so that means bugger all, and frankly a £550 fine means nothing as it's hundreds of times cheaper than getting a new vehicle, there's simply not enough in this to make much if any difference either short, medium or long term, typical piecemeal waffle that has no teeth to it!

If they had said failure would be a minimum of £5000 with same for each and every vehicle in the companies posession/been used on the roads plus another £10k for each and every further transgressions post being caught the first time, then I'd think they were actually serious about this. Oh and further actions/sanctions on owners/directors with suspended ban on operating license.

Avatar
RobD | 5 years ago
0 likes

Or a cheaper and more effective measure that could be implimented quickly would be to reduce speed limits so that there aren't vehicles moving around quickly with people taking risks not to have to stop

Avatar
quiff replied to RobD | 5 years ago
4 likes

RobD wrote:

Or a cheaper and more effective measure that could be implimented quickly would be to reduce speed limits so that there aren't vehicles moving around quickly with people taking risks not to have to stop

Many accidents involving HGVs happen well below the speed limit at junctions and turnings, where an HGV driver has not seen / been able to see a vulnerable road user in front of or beside them. A HGV driving at 5mph is still capable of killing or maiming. The visibility requirements seek to address that and are likely to be more effective in doing so.     

Avatar
ktache | 5 years ago
4 likes

It has been said, but back in the day when the steering wheel could decapatate you and the seatbelt was never worn and rarely even available, lapbelt perhaps, they still drove like maniacs, and often drunk.  Killing themselves by the thousands.  Brakes and tyres were worse too, less power and speed mind, but that was hardly a safety feature.

Avatar
Milkfloat | 5 years ago
0 likes

Is this a £550 a day fine or a one off?

 

I look forward to all the shit trucks that are banned from London being shifted into my roads, just brilliant.

Avatar
Awavey | 5 years ago
1 like

well TfLs press release only mentions HGVs over 12 tonnes, which fine includes the tipper truck in the picture and no cyclist will be unhappy to see those made safe, but how many vehicles will this actually impact ?

and is it worth noting the new routemaster is 12.65 tonnes.

Avatar
ex_terra | 5 years ago
3 likes

Cemex deserve some real credit for their work in this area.

Subsequent to one of their lorries being involved in a cycle fatality - I think it was in Notting Hill, they have proactively implemented a range of safety measures including technology, driver training etc and have advocated very strongly for others to do the same. Their latest commitment shows how a single company with leaders that take can be a force for good - probably one of the better examples of corporate social responsibility in action.

Avatar
brooksby | 5 years ago
3 likes

I wonder how many decades it'll take for legislation like this to trickle down to the Land Outside London...?

Avatar
Pushing50 replied to brooksby | 5 years ago
3 likes

brooksby wrote:

I wonder how many decades it'll take for legislation like this to trickle down to the Land Outside London...?

My thoughts exactly. And another thing that springs to mind on this news. When will we see car manufacturers having to abide by similar designs to eliminate blind spots. Pillars on all vehicles are grossly too big, and the designs are modelled on SUVs for even the smaller model of car.  

Avatar
burtthebike replied to Pushing50 | 5 years ago
1 like

Pushing50 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

I wonder how many decades it'll take for legislation like this to trickle down to the Land Outside London...?

My thoughts exactly. And another thing that springs to mind on this news. When will we see car manufacturers having to abide by similar designs to eliminate blind spots. Pillars on all vehicles are grossly too big, and the designs are modelled on SUVs for even the smaller model of car.  

The massive A pillars were introduced to make cars safer, but only for the occupants, not other road users.  It's been said many times before, but the safest car would have no seat belts, air bags or side impact protection and a 12" rusty bayonet in the middle of the steering wheel.

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to burtthebike | 5 years ago
0 likes

burtthebike wrote:

It's been said many times before, but the safest car would have no seat belts, air bags or side impact protection and a 12" rusty bayonet in the middle of the steering wheel.

It has been said many times before. Proverbs 17.28 come to mind.

Avatar
brooksby replied to fukawitribe | 5 years ago
0 likes

fukawitribe wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

It's been said many times before, but the safest car would have no seat belts, air bags or side impact protection and a 12" rusty bayonet in the middle of the steering wheel.

It has been said many times before. Proverbs 17.28 come to mind.

Bible wrote:

"Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise;

when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent."

But is that a MUST or a SHOULD?

 

Avatar
burtthebike replied to brooksby | 5 years ago
3 likes

brooksby wrote:

I wonder how many decades it'll take for legislation like this to trickle down to the Land Outside London...?

Quite a few, if you use the pavement parking law as a yardstick.  Banned in London in 1974, but no government has made it national.

Latest Comments