Reply to: Tjhe autism defence

[BrilloPad]

The Irish are still trying to understand the kilo.

They understand how to serve a great pint!

[Anonimouse]

Grandfather’s rights

[Zigenare]

Apparently not according to the gov site.

We s also have different regs to you young pups according to that.

Indeed we do.

[minestrone]

The Irish are still trying to understand the kilo.

[DoctorStrangelove]

Actually thinking about it, if he thought he sat a test in northern Ireland then why did he need to apply to have the hgv part added to his 'UK' licence? It's the same licence is it not?

Apparently not according to the gov site.

We s also have different regs to you young pups according to that.

[KinooOrKinog]

Not really - as I say, you can drive something that's 3.5t on a car license. The C1 gets you up to 7.5t and then you need a C (the old Class 2) license to go above that.

3.5t is basically a van. In fact, you need a C1 license to drive most ambulances in the UK. Most actual trucks require a C license which is >7.5t

Does it really matter whether an hgv is 3.5 or 7.5? The fact is he had a fake hgv licence so I suppose it's safe to assume he had therefore been driving an hgv without a licence.
Actually thinking about it, if he thought he sat a test in northern Ireland then why did he need to apply to have the hgv part added to his 'UK' licence? It's the same licence is it not?

[vwdan]

He faked a HGV licence. That is 3.5 tonne.

Not really - as I say, you can drive something that's 3.5t on a car license. The C1 gets you up to 7.5t and then you need a C (the old Class 2) license to go above that.

3.5t is basically a van. In fact, you need a C1 license to drive most ambulances in the UK. Most actual trucks require a C license which is >7.5t

[Anonimouse]

There is an increased level of regulation on HGV because it is a 3.5 tonne object.

Hgv is 7.5 tonne not 3.5

[minestrone]

That's still a non sequitur. I also want people who drive trucks* without the correct licensing. I'm asking, given the facts, what the public gains from further pushing the case against Martin - you seem to be answering why we have laws and regs.

*I dunno if the use of 3.5t is meant to make you sound smart, but just FYI 3.5t is the upper limit of the standard car (B) license. To go over, you just need the C1 license which takes you up to 7.5t, or the full C which takes you up to whatever (44t as standard, higher if your firm has the correct licenses)

He faked a HGV licence. That is 3.5 tonne.

[AtW]

The article doesn't really make sense to me. It says he believed he had sat a test in northern Ireland. Surely he had to apply for a test date, then attend a test centre to sit the test. Is it saying someone conned him into thinking he had done that when he hadn't & then issued him with a fake license? For what gain?

140

[BrilloPad]

I would apologise for spelling mistake in title. But I am autistic so can do what I want when I want to! Suck it up losers......

[vwdan]

If your question is..

"What public interest would there be in pursuing this case against Guy"

… I want to know that people driving 3.5 lorries next to my family car are vetted.

That's still a non sequitur. I also want people who drive trucks* without the correct licensing. I'm asking, given the facts, what the public gains from further pushing the case against Martin - you seem to be answering why we have laws and regs.

*I dunno if the use of 3.5t is meant to make you sound smart, but just FYI 3.5t is the upper limit of the standard car (B) license. To go over, you just need the C1 license which takes you up to 7.5t, or the full C which takes you up to whatever (44t as standard, higher if your firm has the correct licenses)

[minestrone]

The article doesn't really make sense to me. It says he believed he had sat a test in northern Ireland. Surely he had to apply for a test date, then attend a test centre to sit the test. Is it saying someone conned him into thinking he had done that when he hadn't & then issued him with a fake license? For what gain?

Exactly.

[KinooOrKinog]

The article doesn't really make sense to me. It says he believed he had sat a test in northern Ireland. Surely he had to apply for a test date, then attend a test centre to sit the test. Is it saying someone conned him into thinking he had done that when he hadn't & then issued him with a fake license? For what gain?

[minestrone]

That isn't an answer to the question I asked.

If your question is..

"What public interest would there be in pursuing this case against Guy"

… I want to know that people driving 3.5 lorries next to my family car are vetted.