Garda Stop 16 yr old driver

jay gatsby

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/boy-16-found-driving-tractor-on-main-road-was-a-learner-30325068.html

Can't see the illegality in this but the guards posted it on their twitter feed apparently?

Kovu

We were discussing that in chit chat yesterday-

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/473372972720615424/photo/1

About 3/4 down the page the reply from Gardaí is '' Yes carrying a passenger (not a qualified Driver,) no tax no insurance. Owner must ensure vehicles is legal''

_Brian

Seems fair enough on the side of the Guards.
The law is the law, even during silage season.

lakill Farm

I got a bit of abuse on it :cool:

micraX

they shouldn't have made a deal of the age, the matter was lack of tax and insurence and carrying unlicensed passenger.

yellow50HX

micraX wrote: »

they shouldn't have made a deal of the age, the matter was lack of tax and insurence and carrying unlicensed passenger.

Been while since I was a teenager but I do have a question.

For L drivers on tractors can they only drive tractors that actually have a seat that can carry a passenger so as to have qualified driver with them? I would say the majority or tractors in the country would still not have a seat as standard? Same question goes for small cc motor bikes. Think it might be time for the rules to be updated to take into the size of tractors nowadays. When I was a kid a tractor over 100hp was what arrived a couple of times a year with the contractor, now it's a yard machine.

micraX

yellow50HX wrote: »

Been while since I was a teenager but I do have a question.

For L drivers on tractors can they only drive tractors that actually have a seat that can carry a passenger so as to have qualified driver with them? I would say the majority or tractors in the country would still not have a seat as standard? Same question goes for small cc motor bikes. Think it might be time for the rules to be updated to take into the size of tractors nowadays. When I was a kid a tractor over 100hp was what arrived a couple of times a year with the contractor, now it's a yard machine.

there is no provisional tractor licence, you do theory test, you get learners permit, for can and it allows you drive a tractor. you can drive a tractor without a passenger seat no bother, but i would disagree there, most tractors these days have one.
your not allowed drive one with a passenger seat bar the person in the seat has a licence and is 'teaching' you.
thats the way it is as far as i know.
I was drawing corn and spuds when i was 16 in tractors with passenger seats, guess i was breaking the law haha

lakill Farm

lads he wasn't driving a tractor, he was indeedn as per the Garda driving a

"Monster"

seems you have to have a licence , tax and insurance for one of them also

I better back tax my monster

Reggie.

lakill Farm wrote: »

lads he wasn't driving a tractor, he was indeedn as per the Garda driving a

"Monster"

seems you have to have a licence , tax and insurance for one of them also

I better back tax my monster

Behave

Kovu

Reggie. wrote: »

Behave

:rolleyes:

Reggie.

.Kovu. wrote: »

:rolleyes:

What.......

Kovu

Reggie. wrote: »

What.......

Nothing! Regarding the tractor license though, as yellow50HX said above, do you think the RSA should change the rules so that there is a maximum HP that 16yr olds can drive on the road, at least until they can prove their competency at it?

I honestly can't give much opinion on it as I don't really drive ours, although I learned at a young age in the field.

_Brian

.Kovu. wrote: »

Nothing! Regarding the tractor license though, as yellow50HX said above, do you think the RSA should change the rules so that there is a maximum HP that 16yr olds can drive on the road, at least until they can prove their competency at it?

I honestly can't give much opinion on it as I don't really drive ours, although I learned at a young age in the field.

I would support what your suggesting..
Common sense would dictate that a typical 16 year old isn't experienced enough to handle large, heavy and often reasonably fast equipment on the open roads. Compared to 20 years ago roads are far busier, and generally traffic is much faster..

I think the lax attitude generally shown towards this is reflected in the death levels on farms and general injury statistics across the country, health and safety is not prioritised sufficiently in Irish farming. I would see this continuing until an expensive and intrusive system is forced upon the farming sector rather than it facing up to its own responsibilities, then there will be moaning.
The "I did it and it did me no harm" attitude is stupid and it makes farming look like a regressive industry.

Damo810

_Brian wrote: »

I would support what your suggesting..
Common sense would dictate that a typical 16 year old isn't experienced enough to handle large, heavy and often reasonably fast equipment on the open roads. Compared to 20 years ago roads are far busier, and generally traffic is much faster..

I think the lax attitude generally shown towards this is reflected in the death levels on farms and general injury statistics across the country, health and safety is not prioritised sufficiently in Irish farming. I would see this continuing until an expensive and intrusive system is forced upon the farming sector rather than it facing up to its own responsibilities, then there will be moaning.
The "I did it and it did me no harm" attitude is stupid and it makes farming look like a regressive industry.

But you can't tar every 16 year old with the same brush, plenty of them are far more competent than their 40 year old counterparts. Two accidents happened around here this year that I know of, both when men in their 50's and theres no shortage of 'young bucks' going around in tractors.

I'd like to see the statistics before making sweeping statements, just how many farm accidents are attributed to people under 20 and driving 'monsters' as the guards put it. If the tractor had been fully legal (taxed and insured which it wasn't) and the young lad was fully legal too, then I have no problem with it, as theres no hope in hell a contractor would put himself int eh situation with 100K+ worth of kit is on the line with a clown that isn't competent.

Are our standards good enough as thing stand? Probably not, passing the theory is a piece of cake for most, should that allow you to drive whatever type of machinery you want, no, but the owners of this machinery must also exercise common sense, if they don't feel the driver is competent, do you really think they'd let them drive machinery that costs as much as that setup does, risking a huge insurance claim and that doesn't even bring in the factor that he will be using that machinery to work on someones land, so he must be decent enough in the field too, or they'll soon lose business and money.

micraX

Damo810 wrote: »

But you can't tar every 16 year old with the same brush, plenty of them are far more competent than their 40 year old counterparts. Two accidents happened around here this year that I know of, both when men in their 50's and theres no shortage of 'young bucks' going around in tractors.

I'd like to see the statistics before making sweeping statements, just how many farm accidents are attributed to people under 20 and driving 'monsters' as the guards put it. If the tractor had been fully legal (taxed and insured which it wasn't) and the young lad was fully legal too, then I have no problem with it, as theres no hope in hell a contractor would put himself int eh situation with 100K+ worth of kit is on the line with a clown that isn't competent.

Are our standards good enough as thing stand? Probably not, passing the theory is a piece of cake for most, should that allow you to drive whatever type of machinery you want, no, but the owners of this machinery must also exercise common sense, if they don't feel the driver is competent, do you really think they'd let them drive machinery that costs as much as that setup does, risking a huge insurance claim and that doesn't even bring in the factor that he will be using that machinery to work on someones land, so he must be decent enough in the field too, or they'll soon lose business and money.

i agree with everything above, but it wouldnt have been fully legal as he had a passenger without a licence.

_Brian

Damo810 wrote: »

But you can't tar every 16 year old with the same brush, plenty of them are far more competent than their 40 year old counterparts. Two accidents happened around here this year that I know of, both when men in their 50's and theres no shortage of 'young bucks' going around in tractors.

I'd like to see the statistics before making sweeping statements, just how many farm accidents are attributed to people under 20 and driving 'monsters' as the guards put it. If the tractor had been fully legal (taxed and insured which it wasn't) and the young lad was fully legal too, then I have no problem with it, as theres no hope in hell a contractor would put himself int eh situation with 100K+ worth of kit is on the line with a clown that isn't competent.

Are our standards good enough as thing stand? Probably not, passing the theory is a piece of cake for most, should that allow you to drive whatever type of machinery you want, no, but the owners of this machinery must also exercise common sense, if they don't feel the driver is competent, do you really think they'd let them drive machinery that costs as much as that setup does, risking a huge insurance claim and that doesn't even bring in the factor that he will be using that machinery to work on someones land, so he must be decent enough in the field too, or they'll soon lose business and money.

In what other industry would you have someone justifying minors, just children out working large dangerous equipment in among the general public.

If we leave it up to equipment owners then they'd want 14 year olds at it too because some of them are mighty sensible too.

It's like a PTO guard. It's always been ok to run the equipment without one so why bother getting one installed, we all know to keep away from the shaft - yet every year we see accidents involving them. Same for slurry tanks, we all know they are dangerous and going into one risks death - again every year people die in them. Farmers are renowned for taking risks, it's borne out in the accidents and deaths every year.
In other industries safety is approached from the perspective of risk assessments and not evidence of accidents before a change is made.
A situation is assessed based on likelihood of it happening and the potential severity of the incidents. When a problem occurs a 16 year old is not equipped with the experience to deal with the events. If 16 year olds were deemed likely to deal with such situations they would have car licences. They traditionally had a W licence back in a time when tractors, equipment and notions of safety were all less then now.

We need a fresh progressive approach to farm safety and not stay rooted in the past. It's a bit like the Indo ad "before you make up your mind- open it".

micraX

_Brian wrote: »

In what other industry would you have someone justifying minors, just children out working large dangerous equipment in among the general public.

If we leave it up to equipment owners then they'd want 14 year olds at it too because some of them are mighty sensible too.

It's like a PTO guard. It's always been ok to run the equipment without one so why bother getting one installed, we all know to keep away from the shaft - yet every year we see accidents involving them. Same for slurry tanks, we all know they are dangerous and going into one risks death - again every year people die in them. Farmers are renowned for taking risks, it's borne out in the accidents and deaths every year.
In other industries safety is approached from the perspective of risk assessments and not evidence of accidents before a change is made.
A situation is assessed based on likelihood of it happening and the potential severity of the incidents. When a problem occurs a 16 year old is not equipped with the experience to deal with the events. If 16 year olds were deemed likely to deal with such situations they would have car licences. They traditionally had a W licence back in a time when tractors, equipment and notions of safety were all less then now.

We need a fresh progressive approach to farm safety and not stay rooted in the past. It's a bit like the Indo ad "before you make up your mind- open it".

your legally aloud drive on privet land at 14 with owners consent.

_Brian

While I don't specifically agree with that at least it minimises the risk to the general public which is the crux of the current thread.

Allowing minors to drive ever increasing sized and complexity equipment, often working long days similar to adults is not a great state of affairs for the industry. It's scientifically known that teenagers assess risk very differently, often underestimating potential dangers and indeed often seeking out thrills by pushing situations to and indeed beyond their safe limits.

I spent years in industrial safety. In any other industry using 14 or 16 year olds to work such dangerous machinery, often to save on wages would lead to prosecutions. Why do contractors feel they should be treated any different.

I know full well that many read this and screw their eyes up to heaven muttering -"FFS where will this H&S bullshiite end", hopefully with less farmers killed each year.

Damo810

_Brian wrote: »

In what other industry would you have someone justifying minors, just children out working large dangerous equipment in among the general public.

If we leave it up to equipment owners then they'd want 14 year olds at it too because some of them are mighty sensible too.

It's like a PTO guard. It's always been ok to run the equipment without one so why bother getting one installed, we all know to keep away from the shaft - yet every year we see accidents involving them. Same for slurry tanks, we all know they are dangerous and going into one risks death - again every year people die in them. Farmers are renowned for taking risks, it's borne out in the accidents and deaths every year.
In other industries safety is approached from the perspective of risk assessments and not evidence of accidents before a change is made.
A situation is assessed based on likelihood of it happening and the potential severity of the incidents. When a problem occurs a 16 year old is not equipped with the experience to deal with the events. If 16 year olds were deemed likely to deal with such situations they would have car licences. They traditionally had a W licence back in a time when tractors, equipment and notions of safety were all less then now.

We need a fresh progressive approach to farm safety and not stay rooted in the past. It's a bit like the Indo ad "before you make up your mind- open it".

What other business' are like farming though? Your comparing apples with oranges, how many business' with vehicles worth over 100K are simply family run?

just children out working large dangerous equipment in among the general public."

I'll say it again, how many farm accidents are caused by people aged between 16-20 and machinery? Saying 'just children' may appeal to the emotions of some, but at 16 most of them have a good few years experience, they aren't just children, they have been deemed, by the law as legally fit to drive, your completely exaggerating the argument here.

If we leave it up to equipment owners then they'd want 14 year olds at it too because some of them are mighty sensible too. "

Who has called for this? Nothing more than a straw man argument..

"It's like a PTO guard. It's always been ok to run the equipment without one so why bother getting one installed, we all know to keep away from the shaft - yet every year we see accidents involving them. Same for slurry tanks, we all know they are dangerous and going into one risks death - again every year people die in them. Farmers are renowned for taking risks, it's borne out in the accidents and deaths every year.
In other industries safety is approached from the perspective of risk assessments and not evidence of accidents before a change is made.
A situation is assessed based on likelihood of it happening and the potential severity of the incidents. When a problem occurs a 16 year old is not equipped with the experience to deal with the events. If 16 year olds were deemed likely to deal with such situations they would have car licences. They traditionally had a W licence back in a time when tractors, equipment and notions of safety were all less then now.
"

Yet I look on youtube at the farm safety video stories, and the PTO cases are about older men.

Your targeting younger lads unfairly here, many of which are far more competent behind the wheel than older farmers, they're more up to date with new procedures and imo, more open to change, such as putting a shaft on the PTO, or putting up a new crush for safety. We see how young lads on here are far more open to change on here everyday and how they meet resistance from their 'aul bucks'. They are the ones with the mindset, 'sure thats the way we always done it'. Only the last day while out for a cycle I met 2 old men, above in a trailer, one on a ladder painting the house, the old man holding the ladder must have been 80+ and the man on the ladder in his 60's, but it's young men who aren't 'mighty sensible'.

There is a problem within our industry, but targeting younger lads is unfair, unjust and frankly ridiculous. Your talking about their experience, but if you take them off the road they have no way of gaining any.

_Brian

So you only see old lads being mangled with PTO's on YouTube therefore you only associate the danger to older farmers ??
And then think my point is ridiculous!

Yes no other industry is like farming. But farming can learn from the improvements in safety achieved in other industries. Bringing safety to the fore, assessing risks, changing dangerous practice. The fact that farming is family run is more of a reason to change, not some get out of jail card to justify things.

All farming safety has been aimed at the old and young on family farms. They are the most voulenerable.

Damo810

_Brian wrote: »

So you only see old lads being mangled with PTO's on YouTube therefore you only associate the danger to older farmers ??
And then think my point is ridiculous!

Yes no other industry is like farming. But farming can learn from the improvements in safety achieved in other industries. Bringing safety to the fore, assessing risks, changing dangerous practice. The fact that farming is family run is more of a reason to change, not some get out of jail card to justify things.

All farming safety has been aimed at the old and young on family farms. They are the most voulenerable.

You know full well thats not my point. I'm just pointing out the blatantly obvious fact that it's not just younger drivers that have problems. The fact that your unfairly targeting just them is my point.

The rest of your post I agree with, but it should be rolled out to the whole farming community, not just taking people under 20 off the roads like you seem to think they should. They're not the major problem in our industry you seem to think they are.

_Brian

From The HSA website on young persons in agriculture..
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Publications_and_Forms/Publications/Codes_of_Practice/The_Children_and_Young_Persons_in_Agriculture_COP_.pdf

8. Operating Machinery
There are certain types of machine which have a high
level of risk due to the components involved, complex
control systems, the substances used in them
or the specialist knowledge required to operate them
safely. Because of this, minors should be prohibited
from driving, or operating, the following -

• Towed/self-propelled harvesters and processing machines (except those machines designed for operation by people in addition to the driver and where the young person is on the operating platform and under the supervision of an adult)
• Trailers and towed machinery with built-in conveying, loading, or spreading mechanisms
• Power-driven machines incorporating cutting, splitting, grinding or crushing mechanisms (including chainsaws)
• Chemical applicators of any sort, including hand-held equipment
• Machines incorporating power-driven soil engaging parts
• Ditching and drainage machinery
• Material handlers including skid steer loaders, lift trucks and track-laying vehicles
• Slurry tankers
• Powered feed-preparation equipment
• NB:- The list above is not exhaustive

Like I said before, it would be better for farming if it moved to implement some of this stuff before it is forced upon the industry by an external body which would no doubt have more cost and complication involved.

Vandy West

Age should have nothing to do with it. I am over 35 and never driven a tractor on a public road, why should I be considered more competent to drive than a 16 year old. My reflexes are probably slower so in case of the unexpected the 16 year old may be better at reacting. Also cant see how the size of a tractor should have any impact, don't think a pedestrian or small car would notice the difference between getting hit by a 80hp or 120hp tractor.

Oldtree

There is the issue of experience that a 16 year old just wouldn't have imo. I have noticed a number of young drivers on the road and they clearly lack judgement which is brought about by experience over many years of driving, leading to them taking risks that I would not. That is not to say a young driver cannot be able and competent.

Vandy West

Oldtree wrote: »

There is the issue of experience that a 16 year old just wouldn't have imo. I have noticed a number of young drivers on the road and they clearly lack judgement which is brought about by experience over many years of driving, leading to them taking risks that I would not. That is not to say a young driver cannot be able and competent.

Driving is mostly a physical activity so as a 16 year old is as physically able as any adult it would be unfair to restrict them.

As far as the mental side of driving (risky behavior, patience, judgement) I'd say you could make general comments about any age group and the comment would apply to some percentage of the age group. I've seen bad driving by all age groups, so don't think it's fair to put restrictions on people by their age.

If i had a tractor worth 100k probably wouldn't let a 16 year old drive it (or a 70 year old), but sadly don't have that problem.

Zr105

Oldtree wrote: »

There is the issue of experience that a 16 year old just wouldn't have imo. I have noticed a number of young drivers on the road and they clearly lack judgement which is brought about by experience over many years of driving, leading to them taking risks that I would not. That is not to say a young driver cannot be able and competent.

But to be honest you have contradicted yourself in that very statement.

To be competent means you must have gained experience IMO....

I started at 16 on the roads, if anything I'd have been slower about doing certain things then than now, for instance it would often take me longer to pull out of a junction, not through lack of experience but more that i would be almost over careful to ensure i had enough of a break in traffic.
I certainly agree that it is unfair to tar all young lads with the one brush, yes there are a lot of clowns out there, but there are equally as many clowns that are older and apparently wiser,

I have a lot of hours clocked up on the road with tractors with all sorta of gear by know and to be honest the biggest risk i see now is complacency, tasks I've done so many times over that you would near go into auto pilot on, like drawing out slurry and turning in through the same gate time and time again.

Oldtree

Vandy West wrote: »

Driving is mostly a physical activity so as a 16 year old is as physically able as any adult it would be unfair to restrict them.

As far as the mental side of driving (risky behavior, patience, judgement) I'd say you could make general comments about any age group and the comment would apply to some percentage of the age group. I've seen bad driving by all age groups, so don't think it's fair to put restrictions on people by their age.

If i had a tractor worth 100k probably wouldn't let a 16 year old drive it (or a 70 year old), but sadly don't have that problem.

I agree that there are bad drivers of all ages. I wasn't making a general statement, I was making a statement based on my experiences of having been on the roads here for 14 years. It is my opinion that younger drivers take more risks due to lack of judgement. However you have to acknowledge that lack of experience nomatter what viewpoint you come at this from. If a young driver has had appropriate training then on he/she goes.

Oldtree

Zr105 wrote: »

But to be honest you have contradicted yourself in that very statement.

To be competent means you must have gained experience IMO....

I started at 16 on the roads, if anything I'd have been slower about doing certain things then than now, for instance it would often take me longer to pull out of a junction, not through lack of experience but more that i would be almost over careful to ensure i had enough of a break in traffic.
I certainly agree that it is unfair to tar all young lads with the one brush, yes there are a lot of clowns out there, but there are equally as many clowns that are older and apparently wiser,

I have a lot of hours clocked up on the road with tractors with all sorta of gear by know and to be honest the biggest risk i see now is complacency, tasks I've done so many times over that you would near go into auto pilot on, like drawing out slurry and turning in through the same gate time and time again.

A young driver who has been trained properly can be competent, sadly many are not.

larrymiller

Oldtree wrote: »

A young driver who has been trained properly can be competent, sadly many are not.

A lot of drivers from all ages have not been fully trained

Oldtree

larrymiller wrote: »

A lot of drivers from all ages have not been fully trained

Oldtree wrote: »

I agree that there are bad drivers of all ages.

and your point is???

Base price

As an aside, but pertinent to the discussion, is the issue of gender equalisation in the insurance industry, or more importantly, prior to it coming into effect.
It was well know that male drivers under 25 were a higher risk category due to historical claims.
As a mother of 2 lads, I never allowed them to drive on the road (particularly at 16 years of age) with our tractor (MF3080) whether it was drawing an implement or not. That tractor was small compared to more modern day ones and did not have a 40 kph gearbox. However I am not a contractor just a responsible parent.
Is there a shortage of older experienced drivers in the country?
Is it a case that some guys do not want to pay extra for older experienced drivers?
I have to agree with some of the previous posters that 16 yo drivers lack the experience and general road savvy/judgement.
Also someone made the point earlier that farming is unique as it is the only family run business where you are dealing with equipment that is 100K in value. I think that commercial fishing is also simular and as far as I know in order to skipper a trawler you have to go through some sort of CPC in order to be certified. Stand corrected though.

larrymiller

Oldtree wrote: »

and your point is???

:rolleyes:
Smartarse!!!

_Brian

It's a sad state if affairs for any potential improvement in safety figures.

Here we have people arguing blindly that 16 year olds are suitably experienced and capable to operate industrial scale equipment out among the general public. Just because we've always done this is no reason to justify it's continuance.

16 year olds lack the sense of perception of potential dangers than older operators would have.

Equally aren't we going to see a change in liscencing for tractors drawing low loaders and larger trailers being brought in. This is to ensure drivers are trained and tested to ensure safety.

This the exact mindset that sees farming at the top if workplace deaths and from memory our death rates are twice the EU average.

whelan2

Base price wrote: »

As an aside, but pertinent to the discussion, is the issue of gender equalisation in the insurance industry, or more importantly, prior to it coming into effect.
It was well know that male drivers under 25 were a higher risk category due to historical claims.
As a mother of 2 lads, I never allowed them to drive on the road (particularly at 16 years of age) with our tractor (MF3080) whether it was drawing an implement or not. That tractor was small compared to more modern day ones and did not have a 40 kph gearbox. However I am not a contractor just a responsible parent.
Is there a shortage of older experienced drivers in the country?
Is it a case that some guys do not want to pay extra for older experienced drivers?
I have to agree with some of the previous posters that 16 yo drivers lack the experience and general road savvy/judgement.
Also someone made the point earlier that farming is unique as it is the only family run business where you are dealing with equipment that is 100K in value. I think that commercial fishing is also simular and as far as I know in order to skipper a trawler you have to go through some sort of CPC in order to be certified. Stand corrected though.

agree no child of mine will be on the road driving a tractor at 16. Fair enough there are guys on here that drove tractors from 6 years of age or whatever, it wont happen here

larrymiller

_Brian wrote: »

It's a sad state if affairs for any potential improvement in safety figures.

Here we have people arguing blindly that 16 year olds are suitably experienced and capable to operate industrial scale equipment out among the general public. Just because we've always done this is no reason to justify it's continuance.

16 year olds lack the sense of perception of potential dangers than older operators would have.

Equally aren't we going to see a change in liscencing for tractors drawing low loaders and larger trailers being brought in. This is to ensure drivers are trained and tested to ensure safety.

This the exact mindset that sees farming at the top if workplace deaths and from memory our death rates are twice the EU average.

Well said. The fact is that change is needed.

fastrac

All we have to do is look at the commercial vehicle / trailer laws and see exactly whats on the way for tractors.

whelan2

fastrac wrote: »

All we have to do is look at the commercial vehicle / trailer laws and see exactly whats on the way for tractors.

oh was stopped by rsa a week or 2 ago, his trailer had passed test a month previous, he was done for a split pin being missing in brake calliper on trailer.

larrymiller

whelan2 wrote: »

oh was stopped by rsa a week or 2 ago, his trailer had passed test a month previous, he was done for a split pin being missing in brake calliper on trailer.

What he get a fine? I didn't think those lads would even know to look for that!

lakill Farm

larrymiller wrote: »

What he get a fine? I didn't think those lads would even know to look for that!

they have the ability to carry out as many tests as a DOE centre and with more manpower

Reggie.

lakill Farm wrote: »

they have the ability to carry out as many tests as a DOE centre and with more manpower

And bring ya to a doe centre if required

Oldtree

larrymiller wrote: »

:rolleyes:
Smartarse!!!

I'm still waiting... Let me guess, you didn't read the previous posts before jumping in. Impetuous youth :rolleyes:

larrymiller

lakill Farm wrote: »

they have the ability to carry out as many tests as a DOE centre and with more manpower

I never new, it's only right in fairness. They'll be doing the same with tractors in the future.

larrymiller

Oldtree wrote: »

I'm still waiting... Let me guess, you didn't read the previous posts before jumping in. Impetuous youth :rolleyes:

Yes yes you're correct old...

whelan2

larrymiller wrote: »

What he get a fine? I didn't think those lads would even know to look for that!

no he had 10 days to fix it, lad that stopped him rang him when the 10 days was up and oh had to give written confirmation that he had got it fixed

larrymiller

whelan2 wrote: »

no he had 10 days to fix it, lad that stopped him rang him when the 10 days was up and oh had to give written confirmation that he had got it fixed

At least he was given a fair chance

Reggie.

larrymiller wrote: »

I never new, it's only right in fairness. They'll be doing the same with tractors in the future.

Already are around Mullingar. They have two jeeps and trailers with weighing equipment here. Went a little mad with the height restrictions when they were in for that short while