London Cycling Campaign asks "Why was Dennis Putz allowed to kill?"

My company takes a photocopy of my licence every 6 months, if they do the same which they should they would have known about putz's previous offences. Its drivers like him that give the rest of use proffesional drivers a bad name.

Although I agree with most of the Five point safety plan these are the problems I can forsee:

1 Cyclist-awareness training for drivers

All city lorry drivers should be have ongoing cycle-awareness training, including on-bike experience.
**Who would pay for this? and what constitutesa city lorry driver (I drive in to london on the odd occasion but dont see myself as a city driver)**

2 Drivers must take more responsibility

Authorities must recognise driver responsibility for doing everything practical to reduce risks. Blaming a ‘blind spot’ should be an admission of guilt.
**Lorry design shouldnt be the fault of a driver, more training should be given to cyclists to make them aware of the blind spots of a lorry**

3 Safer design for London lorries

Lorries designed for off-road use should be taken off city streets. The best mirrors, cameras and sensors should be fitted as standard.
**This is a stupid comment, Off road vehicles wouldnt be registered so therefore wouldnt be able to go on the roads, unless they are talking about shunter vehicles used at most ports and distribution centers, they are usually restricted to 15-20mph so surely they would be more safer in town.**

4 Higher standards from lorry operators

Quality-assurance schemes such as London’s Freight Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS) should be mandatory, and the police encouraged to crack down on rogue operators.
**This I agree with whole heartedly, the police and VOSA should be cracking down on rogue companies**

5 More responsible procurement

Companies must only buy haulage services from reputable firms, with government taking a lead in encouraging best practice.
**Again this i agree with, there are more and more companies subbing the work out to foreign companies whos drivers in some cases only need to be able to driver a tractor to drive an HGV**

Plus: Better education for cyclists

Cyclists must be given the most accurate and up-to-date information on riding safely around lorries.
**THIS WOULD SAVE THE MOST LIVES! If more cyclists understood that coming up the left side of a truck thats turning left is a dumb move the less fatalities there would be, also using cycle lanes properly would help, the ammount of times I have seen a cyclist on the main carrigeway instead of in the cycle lane is unbelievable.**

I would imagine the insurance company has more muscle to sue the firm than Ms Patel's family. Normally I wouldn't favour insurance companies cracking down in such a fashion but in this case I think the power of an insurance company could be to good effect for all. If it gets round the industry that insurance firms will kick the hell out of any firm pushing the boundaries too far then there will be a general benefit to safety. The safety record of tipper trucks isn't great. There are certain firms in the business that are run on a less than scrupulous basis.

In the case of corporate manslaughter, it would be the police and the CPS who take action

Let's pray the police push for it - can they tolerate more people like Putz on our roads?

The sad fact is that a road transport company has never been prosecuted for corporate manslaughter - maybe a case as awful as this can change that

…or perhaps if the insurance company take action against Thames Materials. Presumably there is an insurance claim going through and they will surely be looking at the information given to them about Putz, if that doesn't match up with what came out in court someone is going to have some explaining to do.

WIth a list of conviction like those why was he ever given a licence back? (Let alone an HGV licence).

The insurance story sounds fishy as I agree most insurers would not want to cover someone like Putz.
We will probably only find out if Catriona Patel's family sue Thames Materials.

Well I suppose it's more likely that Putz didn't declare them to the company and maybe they didn't push him on producing the paperwork to prove he had a valid, clean licence. It would certainly seem that Thames Materials have some awkward questions to answer.

But Simon, if the insurance company didn't know about the past convictions, that suggests either the driver or the firm failed to declare them. If it was the haulage company that didn't declare the convictions and this can be proved, then the insurtance firm could sue the haulage company for fraud surely?

I hope Catriona's family sue these reckless bastards!!

How do you get insurance for someone who has been convicted of driving 16 times without a licence? Surely that person would be *completely* uninsurable?