Evening, I am at a loss what goes through the minds of some drivers. If they had only dropped the air on the unit

[richielte]

Evening, I am at a loss what goes through the minds of some drivers.
If they had only dropped the air on the unit and trailer, it would have probably gone through without touching the bridge, though it still would have been close.
This is one driver who will be in a driver conduct hearing within the next 5-6 months and probably lose their vocational licence for 6 months.

https://fb.watch/qBWby7MQhb/

[magazineShow]

Far too often in this industry we use the comfort blanket of hindsight biased blame. Us humans have tendency to perceive events that have already happened as being more predictable or enivitable than they actually were.......we just want to point at the driver and say "stupid driver" and maybe, as operators chuck a 'toolbox talk' in there as a nod to prevention.
In reality operating a large vehicle both as a driver and operator is a complex and uncertain thing with multiple factors that influence outcomes........despite this

[richielte]

Far too often in this industry we use the comfort blanket of hindsight biased blame. Us humans have tendency to perceive events that have already happened as being more predictable or enivitable than they actually were.......we just want to point at the driver and say "stupid driver" and maybe, as operators chuck a 'toolbox talk' in there as a nod to prevention.
In reality operating a large vehicle both as a driver and operator is a complex and uncertain thing with multiple factors that influence outcomes........despite this

If anyone wants to start, they will put themselves at risk

[Mseares]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

[jeandspo]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

[Mseares]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

Good For You.....

[jeandspo]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

Good For You.....

I presume you can’t back up those assumptions

[magazineShow]

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

Good For You.....

I presume you can’t back up those assumptions

I kind of understand what Mseares is saying in as much that inexperience brings with it higher risk, but you are absolutely right. It's only when you have a very experienced, very reliable driver do it (which of course they do) you realize "wait a minute, surely they can't all be idiots"
Blaming sat-navs, the imperial system, foreign drivers, and new passes ain't going to solve the issue, and neither is just throwing the driver under the bus (no pun intended ) and simply hoping that the mythical silver bullet for all our woes, the toolbox talk, is sufficient to prevent a re-occurance.

[Mseares]

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

Good For You.....

I presume you can’t back up those assumptions

What a Bunch of Self Imflated Arse Holes we have....God Help anyone who dares to "Call Out" anything for fear of all the Keyboard Numpty's just waiting for the chance to put them down.....Seriously, & BTW, i dont have to Back Up anything to the likes of you. I've been out there, i've seen the Standard of LGV driving today & trust me it's Dangerous.

[jeandspo]

Good For You.....

I presume you can’t back up those assumptions

What a Bunch of Self Imflated Arse Holes we have....God Help anyone who dares to "Call Out" anything for fear of all the Keyboard Numpty's just waiting for the chance to put them down.....Seriously, & BTW, i dont have to Back Up anything to the likes of you. I've been out there, i've seen the Standard of LGV driving today & trust me it's Dangerous.

a candidate for you richielte.

[Mseares]

I presume you can’t back up those assumptions

What a Bunch of Self Imflated Arse Holes we have....God Help anyone who dares to "Call Out" anything for fear of all the Keyboard Numpty's just waiting for the chance to put them down.....Seriously, & BTW, i dont have to Back Up anything to the likes of you. I've been out there, i've seen the Standard of LGV driving today & trust me it's Dangerous.

a candidate for you richielte.

Here we go.....Yet another Self Inflated Numpty.....

[jeandspo]

What a Bunch of Self Imflated Arse Holes we have....God Help anyone who dares to "Call Out" anything for fear of all the Keyboard Numpty's just waiting for the chance to put them down.....Seriously, & BTW, i dont have to Back Up anything to the likes of you. I've been out there, i've seen the Standard of LGV driving today & trust me it's Dangerous.

a candidate for you richielte.

Here we go.....Yet another Self Inflated Numpty.....

the only one putting anyone down is you. Assuming it could only be a new driver and again no evidence to back it up.

[Mseares]

a candidate for you richielte.

Here we go.....Yet another Self Inflated Numpty.....

the only one putting anyone down is you. Assuming it could only be a new driver and again no evidence to back it up.

Mate, no long term professional driver would ever do this....Trust Me. BTW, do you drive Artic's or have Experience of ever done so? This Video is A Novice.

[jeandspo]

Here we go.....Yet another Self Inflated Numpty.....

the only one putting anyone down is you. Assuming it could only be a new driver and again no evidence to back it up.

Mate, no long term professional driver would ever do this....Trust Me. BTW, do you drive Artic's or have Experience of ever done so? This Video is A Novice.

over 30 yrs . Don’t refer to me as mate please,
Long term professional drivers have hit bridges previously.
You seen to have a problem/ issue with new drivers, is that a bruised ego because they can do the same job after say 2 weeks?
Time to stop acting like an adolescent

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

and Jeandspo, play nice!
Mseares, I'm afraid you are wrong. Long term drivers hit bridges, many have and many will continue to, as some don't want to take instructions. A new driver is far easier to train and control and in this case, it could well be a new driver, but I strongly suspect it's a driver with a few years under their belt.

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

See my comment!

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

See my comment!

[jeandspo]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

See my comment!

I mention you due to his derogatory comments

[richielte]

you’re part of the problem here.
Can you prove the assumptions you make?
I’ve worked with a “ long term professional “ c+e driver who struck a bridge.

See my comment!

I mention you due to his derogatory comments

I can see that, but you don't need to retaliate after each comment, so that is why I've told you both to play nice

[jeandspo]

See my comment!

I mention you due to his derogatory comments

I can see that, but you don't need to retaliate after each comment, so that is why I've told you both to play nice

I retaliated because a member was using offensive language towards me that’s all.

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

You're one and only warning, now play nice!
You've stated the standard of LGV driving out on the road is dangerous
It's not all new pass/lesser experienced drivers. There's a hell of a lot of experienced drivers out that have been driving 10, 20, 30 years and should not have a licence!

[richielte]

I mention you due to his derogatory comments

I can see that, but you don't need to retaliate after each comment, so that is why I've told you both to play nice

I retaliated because a member was using offensive language towards me that’s all.

But we all know two wrongs never make a right. Sometimes it's best to be the bigger man and let them have that minute of glory, because that's all it will be

[jeandspo]

I can see that, but you don't need to retaliate after each comment, so that is why I've told you both to play nice

I retaliated because a member was using offensive language towards me that’s all.

But we all know two wrongs never make a right. Sometimes it's best to be the bigger man and let them have that minute of glory, because that's all it will be

my apologies didn’t think that allowed such things

[Mseares]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

You're one and only warning, now play nice!
You've stated the standard of LGV driving out on the road is dangerous
It's not all new pass/lesser experienced drivers. There's a hell of a lot of experienced drivers out that have been driving 10, 20, 30 years and should not have a licence!

Warning Lol....do me favour.

[richielte]

I retaliated because a member was using offensive language towards me that’s all.

But we all know two wrongs never make a right. Sometimes it's best to be the bigger man and let them have that minute of glory, because that's all it will be

my apologies didn’t think that allowed such things

They don't and he's had a warning

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

You're one and only warning, now play nice!
You've stated the standard of LGV driving out on the road is dangerous
It's not all new pass/lesser experienced drivers. There's a hell of a lot of experienced drivers out that have been driving 10, 20, 30 years and should not have a licence!

Warning Lol....do me favour.

I've done you a favour.
You can't act like an adult

[dautie02]

You're one and only warning, now play nice!
You've stated the standard of LGV driving out on the road is dangerous
It's not all new pass/lesser experienced drivers. There's a hell of a lot of experienced drivers out that have been driving 10, 20, 30 years and should not have a licence!

Warning Lol....do me favour.

I've done you a favour.
You can't act like an adult

In my mere opinion new drivers will be more fearful of hitting a bridge than ‘experienced’ drivers. New drivers are just that and more likely to try to avoid low bridges for fear of losing their job, whereas ‘experienced’ drivers are more likely to take the risk, as they’ve probably done it many times over the years and always got away with it. Also, I know for a fact at one company I worked for nearly 30yrs ago there was a low bridge that was on a ‘shortcut’ back to the yard that many drivers took to save around 15 minutes from going the ‘longer way’. Needless to say it took one driver to attempt it, make it through, and then he told others who then attempted it. Us newer drivers didn’t try it, and of course eventually one of them hit it.
Apologies for a bit of a waffle, but I think that sort of proves your point

[richielte]

Warning Lol....do me favour.

I've done you a favour.
You can't act like an adult

In my mere opinion new drivers will be more fearful of hitting a bridge than ‘experienced’ drivers. New drivers are just that and more likely to try to avoid low bridges for fear of losing their job, whereas ‘experienced’ drivers are more likely to take the risk, as they’ve probably done it many times over the years and always got away with it. Also, I know for a fact at one company I worked for nearly 30yrs ago there was a low bridge that was on a ‘shortcut’ back to the yard that many drivers took to save around 15 minutes from going the ‘longer way’. Needless to say it took one driver to attempt it, make it through, and then he told others who then attempted it. Us newer drivers didn’t try it, and of course eventually one of them hit it.
Apologies for a bit of a waffle, but I think that sort of proves your point

I totally agree

[richielte]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

You're one and only warning, now play nice!
You've stated the standard of LGV driving out on the road is dangerous
It's not all new pass/lesser experienced drivers. There's a hell of a lot of experienced drivers out that have been driving 10, 20, 30 years and should not have a licence!

Warning Lol....do me favour.

There's plenty of drivers who have driven for years that have hit a bridge

[paunium]

Sadly, no doubt this will be a "New Pass" the driver market has been Flooded with 100.000 new passes & the Standard of LGV Driving out there now is Shocking. No Long term Professional Class One Driver would have done this.

have you got this weeks winning numbers too?

[Frankho]

the worst thing about this when faced with conduct hearing in front of tc will be he or she realizes it’s not a clear pass and yet kept going that for me is conviction without a second thought as opposed to going down an a road or motorway with a low bridge that doesn’t allow you under it but you can’t slow down in time he or she premeditated to get under it knowing full well the vehicle was too high

[richielte]

the worst thing about this when faced with conduct hearing in front of tc will be he or she realizes it’s not a clear pass and yet kept going that for me is conviction without a second thought as opposed to going down an a road or motorway with a low bridge that doesn’t allow you under it but you can’t slow down in time he or she premeditated to get under it knowing full well the vehicle was too high

I have to agree with you, probably for the first time ever
This case is worse, as the bridge is on a bend, so they would have had to slow right down to them creep under the bridge.
The opportunity was there to avoid this situation.
It's the far side of the bridge where it catches, and the worst thing about this, there's someone actually on the road in front of truck guiding the driver

[Frankho]

the worst thing about this when faced with conduct hearing in front of tc will be he or she realizes it’s not a clear pass and yet kept going that for me is conviction without a second thought as opposed to going down an a road or motorway with a low bridge that doesn’t allow you under it but you can’t slow down in time he or she premeditated to get under it knowing full well the vehicle was too high

I have to agree with you, probably for the first time ever
This case is worse, as the bridge is on a bend, so they would have had to slow right down to them creep under the bridge.
The opportunity was there to avoid this situation.
It's the far side of the bridge where it catches, and the worst thing about this, there's someone actually on the road in front of truck guiding the driver

obviously not doing a very good job. Question does spring to mind that are they not confident enough of reversing trailer blind side so took the option of crunching it and getting through, obviously not an excuse the tc will accept

[paunium]

There have been incidents of bridge clearances being reduced due to road resurfacing but, hey, let’s blame the driver first and ask questions later

[richielte]

There have been incidents of bridge clearances being reduced due to road resurfacing but, hey, let’s blame the driver first and ask questions later

But this isn't one of those situations, Paunium.
The driver has entered the bridge at a slow speed, with minimal clearance, so should be taking extreme care, and is aware that the trailer is touching on exiting the bridge, but decides to keep chugging away. They even have someone guiding them which is beyond belief.
My point of posting is a lot of people will be thinking, it's OK, no harm done, but this situation will really rattle a TC as it could have easily been avoided, so operators/TM's really need to make sure their drivers are aware that risks can cost the company a lot more than a repair bill for a trailer roof repair.
See Frankho comment, one I have to agree with from Frankho, for a change
The TC will also think, if it wasn't all over social media, would the driver have actually bothered to report it, probably not!

[paunium]

There have been incidents of bridge clearances being reduced due to road resurfacing but, hey, let’s blame the driver first and ask questions later

But this isn't one of those situations, Paunium.
The driver has entered the bridge at a slow speed, with minimal clearance, so should be taking extreme care, and is aware that the trailer is touching on exiting the bridge, but decides to keep chugging away. They even have someone guiding them which is beyond belief.
My point of posting is a lot of people will be thinking, it's OK, no harm done, but this situation will really rattle a TC as it could have easily been avoided, so operators/TM's really need to make sure their drivers are aware that risks can cost the company a lot more than a repair bill for a trailer roof repair.
See Frankho comment, one I have to agree with from Frankho, for a change
The TC will also think, if it wasn't all over social media, would the driver have actually bothered to report it, probably not!

and why do we think that the driver might not have reported it?

[richielte]

There have been incidents of bridge clearances being reduced due to road resurfacing but, hey, let’s blame the driver first and ask questions later

But this isn't one of those situations, Paunium.
The driver has entered the bridge at a slow speed, with minimal clearance, so should be taking extreme care, and is aware that the trailer is touching on exiting the bridge, but decides to keep chugging away. They even have someone guiding them which is beyond belief.
My point of posting is a lot of people will be thinking, it's OK, no harm done, but this situation will really rattle a TC as it could have easily been avoided, so operators/TM's really need to make sure their drivers are aware that risks can cost the company a lot more than a repair bill for a trailer roof repair.
See Frankho comment, one I have to agree with from Frankho, for a change
The TC will also think, if it wasn't all over social media, would the driver have actually bothered to report it, probably not!

and why do we think that the driver might not have reported it?

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

[markroon]

But this isn't one of those situations, Paunium.
The driver has entered the bridge at a slow speed, with minimal clearance, so should be taking extreme care, and is aware that the trailer is touching on exiting the bridge, but decides to keep chugging away. They even have someone guiding them which is beyond belief.
My point of posting is a lot of people will be thinking, it's OK, no harm done, but this situation will really rattle a TC as it could have easily been avoided, so operators/TM's really need to make sure their drivers are aware that risks can cost the company a lot more than a repair bill for a trailer roof repair.
See Frankho comment, one I have to agree with from Frankho, for a change
The TC will also think, if it wasn't all over social media, would the driver have actually bothered to report it, probably not!

and why do we think that the driver might not have reported it?

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

[magazineShow]

and why do we think that the driver might not have reported it?

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

Good question - I'd go for the only legal definition there is of an 'accident' and what should be reported as such, as described in the RTA (1988) injury to another person, injury to an animal not carried, damage to another vehicle and damage to property on, or adjacent to the highway. The latter one being relevant in this case. If no discernible damage was done then that's not a reportable event. However what's damage ? a little scrape mark on an solid piece of old infrastructure may not be considered 'damage' yet a tiny scratch on someone's Bentley or Rolls Royce may well be. In this case however right at the end of the clip I think I see a bit of brickwork/masonry being dislodged so I guess that passes the 'damage' test. I'd add to that 'failure to report' any accident (as described by the above) would add significantly more woe to that already coming the drivers way so to to take the safe way out I'd defo report.

[HurstBear]

and why do we think that the driver might not have reported it?

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

[magazineShow]

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

I get that but define 'collision' same as crash, incident etc they have no legal definition. The only legal definition of accident sits in the RTA (1988). Besides Network Rail don't write or maintain laws, its not in their scope to make anything legally clear. However I agree it would be a brave driver/operator that didn't report that incident/collision/accident/rub

[HurstBear]

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

I get that but define 'collision' same as crash, incident etc they have no legal definition. The only legal definition of accident sits in the RTA (1988). Besides Network Rail don't write or maintain laws, its not in their scope to make anything legally clear. However I agree it would be a brave driver/operator that didn't report that incident/collision/accident/rub

I don't have the structural engineering skills to determine what is damage to a bridge or not. If it was to lead to further consequences I don't think my qualifications would stand up to scrutiny. So in my opinion report it and let the experts make that decision.

[markroon]

I haven't said it won't have been reported, but a lot of drivers don't report them if the damage is minimal. My point was how a TC will react if the driver didn't report it and with this type of collision that could have easily been avoided.

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

So as both roofs collide, this meets Network Rail’s definition.

[HurstBear]

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

So as both roofs collide, this meets Network Rail’s definition.

I think I agree with MagazineShow, that it takes a brave driver/operator to not report it. Ultimately contact with a bridge is a strike, whilst I agree a low impact strike is the complete opposite to a full on wallop how do you set the line for reporting ?

[markroon]

I would class what happened as a “roof rub”… I’ve always considered a “roof rub” different than a “bridge strike”. I’d be very interested how others view this difference and whether or not it should actually be reported…

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

I get that but define 'collision' same as crash, incident etc they have no legal definition. The only legal definition of accident sits in the RTA (1988). Besides Network Rail don't write or maintain laws, its not in their scope to make anything legally clear. However I agree it would be a brave driver/operator that didn't report that incident/collision/accident/rub

I could only see dust at the end, but it’s a real edge case isn’t it? The prove able height would be the arguable point in terms of real blame of course. What was the ride height? Payload? Load distribution?
If I was confident and had measured the trailer height as a driver I would have called it in to not only cover my arse in terms of reporting the incident but to get the height of the trailer officially recorded at the scene and the height of the arched bridge reconfirmed between the goal posts as in with road resurfacing anomalies and possible pothole bodging, who knows if the bridge height is still (or was ever) correct.. And the $60M question the OTC will ask - “was the driver routed?”

[BillStill]

But Network Rail is clear in their guidance to drivers as to what they class as a bridge strike

I get that but define 'collision' same as crash, incident etc they have no legal definition. The only legal definition of accident sits in the RTA (1988). Besides Network Rail don't write or maintain laws, its not in their scope to make anything legally clear. However I agree it would be a brave driver/operator that didn't report that incident/collision/accident/rub

I could only see dust at the end, but it’s a real edge case isn’t it? The prove able height would be the arguable point in terms of real blame of course. What was the ride height? Payload? Load distribution?
If I was confident and had measured the trailer height as a driver I would have called it in to not only cover my arse in terms of reporting the incident but to get the height of the trailer officially recorded at the scene and the height of the arched bridge reconfirmed between the goal posts as in with road resurfacing anomalies and possible pothole bodging, who knows if the bridge height is still (or was ever) correct.. And the $60M question the OTC will ask - “was the driver routed?”

I tend to agree A bridge strike is a serious issue now.

[Steviels]

I drove a roll on roll off for a while, made sure I set the height marker to the biggest bin we had. Company director used to say go a shorter route (didn't used to consider it was bumpy as hell and actually slower time wise), you can get under that with the grab body on. My argument was always then what happens when I am used to going under it and just come back that way with a 60yd bin on, I would rather avoid that bridge regardless of what body is on.

[Drewtiey]

Is that the bridge off the A49 for Whitchurch by any chance?

[Grahible]

In my experience it’s a must to report it just to ensure damage is noted and checked. Imagine the situation another vehicle later on has caused more damage and not been seen or recorded but this driver was. He didn’t report it and was blamed for the subsequent damage. It’s also about repetitional damage to a company if the driver is seen to strike a bridge drives off and the next the company knows about it is they’re truck and company name is splashed all over social media. It creates problems at so many levels.

[Jakend]

I threatened all my drivers with imminent death if they did this. I made sure they signed sh** loads of tool box talks, changed the walk round to include height checks etc. The crap that this causes for an operator is horrendous.

[dantainar]

Silly thing to do. Some of them also hitting the A5 bridge between the M69 and Atherstone despite all the low bridge warnings enroute.