Interesting sequel to Hume Highway accident

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

They seem like heavy fines for petty offences. Paperwork mistakes?...really? Wow. Perhaps the fines should be left for those drivers who actually offend dangerously. Like speed!

(Mind you, if you think those fines are heavy, try cutting the footpath crossover phone lines with a digger in or near a cbd. Upwards of hundreds of thousands to a million.......an HOUR)

Doesn’t matter what the penalties are for cutting a phone line in the CBD. You are comparing apples with oranges.

The funny thing that you’ve brought up is that you think that speeding is dangerous, yet an error with your paperwork isn’t. Welcome to our world.

What would you consider more dangerous?
A. A truck driver making a mistake in his log book, or
B. A car travelling through a red light.

Any reasonable person would say B. So why is the penalty for the truck driver making a mistake in his log book double that of the car that ran the red light?
How would you like it if a copper randomly stopped you on the side of the road in your car and demanded to see your work records for the last three months? Then how would you like it if he found that two months ago, you didn’t have a lunch break and in the same week you worked 15 minutes overtime. Not much of a big deal unless you are a truck driver.

Well, if you were a truck driver, you’ve just kissed goodbye to the best part of $1500. Still seem fair? What if you’ve made a mistake calculating your hours or you’ve simply forgotten to sign a page?

What was that, the copper took an instant dislike to you, really? Well he just decided that the matter will be heard by a magistrate with the possibility of a $4000 maximum - per offence.

You people who know very little about the transport industry crack me up.

First of all. This is the national fatigue law. Have a read of this, should only take about three minutes to read and fully understand. Then imagine how YOU would apply this to YOUR working day.

https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/L...avyVehFMNR.pdf

Now for some light reading…

http://www.criminallawyers.net.au/he...ximum-penalty/

[smoo]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

You should try it at an extra 30-50kmh over like we used to do before they took all the fun out of driving, by inventing stuff like radar, divided roads ABS etc

@ 3:30

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...51&pnref=story

[Franco Cozzo]

Why do they punish the drivers rather than the company? I know personal responsibility and everything but it seems the laws are more about punishing the driver than the company who owns the truck and is telling the driver what to do.

Company doesn't care they can pressure the drivers into skirting the laws since it seems the drivers are the ones who cop the fines.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

In a perfect world, yes, but not all owners give a toss.
The owner at the centre of the story weve been discussing had only taken control of the company recently. From all reports his 'mechanic' had flagged the brake issue but at the end of the day it comes down to how the owner of the business views safety and wether he has the capital to get the work done.
We arent talking about Toll or Scotts here, this was a small operator with 20yr old trucks who by his own admission knows bugger all about how trucks function.

Though if you keep records of it (most workshops keep records of work done on customers cars) and something like this happens it could probably be used as evidence in court that he did actually know about the issue.

If one of my customers killed their employees through negligence because they ignored a serious issue I specifically mentioned and noted ill gladly forward information to police or turn up to court to present evidence if required.

I don't care if you choose elsewhere to get that done just get it done when you can.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Full Noise

You people who know very little about the transport industry crack me up.

First of all. This is the national fatigue law. Have a read of this, should only take about three minutes to read and fully understand. Then imagine how YOU would apply this to YOUR working day.

While I agree that a lot of bureaucracy is not very effectively administered, I'd like to know why there should be any different or lesser standards for the trucking industry than rail, air or sea transport? The rest of us would expect nothing less from any of these industries.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Full Noise

why is the penalty for the truck driver making a mistake in his log book double that of the car that ran the red light?

Why does 11kph over the limit on a double demerit weekend have the same number of demerit points as doing 200kph on the freeway?

The penalties aren't proportional to the offence, they're as much about making a political statement as anything else. Statistically, hooning is not a big problem, yet we go so far as crushing their cars. Don't expect any logic or proportionality when it comes to penalties....

[MercurySilver]

they are taking it seriously
we had the cops in work 3 times last month over a log book issue by a truckie
they came here and checked all our cameras to see what time he left
the book was not adding up with what he had recorded in it
nothing to do with the condition of the truck just the log book hrs being a tad....wrong

this has never happened in the 13 years ive been there and it would all be down to the latest blitz on that we are reading about in this post

we get the odd donkey come in and ask if he should strap down or is gates good enough tho
yeah sure
just chuck gates up on those 34 pallets that all weigh a tonne each, no need to strap
shesh...what do you reckon
anything thats suss we are straight into the office and the info is recorded and noted and the driver gets spoken to by the higher ups
they take it pretty seriously for obvious reasons

[aussiblue]

http://www.news.com.au/national/sout...-1227489708331

Widow of truck crash victim Robert Brimson gives emotional victim impact statement in case against negligent trucking boss

This story was published: 5 hours ago August 19, 2015 5:01PM

A WIDOW has told the negligent trucking boss responsible for her husband’s death that her grandchild still believes “fairy magic” will bring pop home.

In a landmark decision, a Supreme Court jury earlier found Peter Francis Colbert, 55, guilty of manslaughter and endangering life over Robert Brimson’s fatal truck crash on Main South Rd, Happy Valley, in March last year.

Mr Brimson died when the brakes of the 1994 Mitsubishi tautliner he was driving — nicknamed “The Big Girl” — failed.

In her victim impact statement read to the court on Wednesday, Agnes Brimson, who was married to Mr Brimson for 24 years before his death, said her life had been forever changed by Colbert’s crimes.

“It breaks my heart hearing my eldest grandchild say fairy magic will bring pop back as I know nothing will bring Robert back and nothing in my life will ever be the same again,” she said.

“I can’t believe my husband went to work and never returned. He was only driving around town. I would never have imagined this could happen.”

Mrs Brimson said her future dreams had been shattered by her husband’s needless death.

“Robert was one of the nicest guys you would ever meet — he loves his family, his friends and would do anything for you,” she said.

“Robert and I met as teenagers and we were both looking forward to being together in retirement. Instead of looking forward to these dreams, I now have to face the reality I’m on my own.”

Colbert was also found guilty of endangering the life of another employee who had driven the same vehicle three days earlier.

During Colbert’s trial, the jury heard six witnesses had complained about the dangerous conditions of the brakes — including one driver who just days before the crash was involved in a near-miss accident.

It is understood Colbert’s case is the first time a company owner has been held criminally responsible for an employee’s death because of work-practice negligence.

Colbert’s lawyer, Edward Stratton-Smith, said his client was extremely sorry for Mr Brimson’s death and did not intentionally hurt him.

“He did not deliberately set out to hurt anyone. He is, of course, negligent on the jury’s verdict, but this is not, of course a case of manslaughter where he set out to hurt someone,” he said.

He said Colbert, whose head remained bowed during the entire hearing, went to Mr Brimson’s funeral and maintains he is a hero for steering his truck away from other traffic on the day of the accident.


“All the defendant can say is that he is deeply sorry and he will be until the day that he dies,” Mr Stratton-Smith said.

Justice David Peek, however, questioned Colbert’s degree of remorse considering he had contested the charges against him at trial, despite six witnesses contradicting his evidence that he knew nothing about the faulty brakes.

“Your client has maintained a position, a false position in my view and that of the jury, as to a lack of awareness of the condition of the brakes,” he said.

Justice Peek will sentence Colbert on Friday.
Originally published as Nothing in my life will ever be the same again: widow

[aussiblue]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-2...-death/6714506

years over driver Robert Brimson's death

By court reporter James Hancock

Updated Fri at 3:01pm

An Adelaide trucking company boss has been jailed for 12 and a half years over a driver's death caused by faulty brakes.

Peter Francis Colbert, 56, was found guilty of manslaughter over the death of driver Robert Brimson in March last year.

Mr Brimson took action to avoid heavy traffic on Main South Road at Happy Valley in the moments before his truck slammed into a pole.

A jury also convicted him of endangering the life of another driver, Shane ******, two days before the fatal crash.

The Supreme Court heard Colbert was repeatedly warned about the truck's faulty brakes.

Justice David Peek said Colbert was a risk-taker on the road who thought he would have survived such a brake failure.

Justice Peek quoted extensively from a psychological report during the hour-long sentencing.

He described Colbert as a narcissist who had misplaced arrogance and self-confidence, particularly about his driving abilities.

He said Colbert told the psychologist he could have survived such brake failure if he was driving.

"I can bet you though that 10 to 1 that I'd still be sitting here talking to you if I did drive the truck that day," Colbert said.

"I don't expect people to do what I can do with a truck.

"The truth is most of the blokes I deal with have no skill.

"To be honest I'm still trying to figure out why he [Mr Brimson] hit the post ... I wouldn't have gone near that.

"It's instinct, you've either got it or you don't.

"But he did save other lives so I can't knock the bloke."

Justice Peek said Colbert continues to deny any knowledge of the truck's faulty brakes, despite the jury verdicts.

"Mr Colbert maintained that no one under his employment had brought the issue of the faulty brakes to his attention prior to the fatal accident," he said.

He said Colbert had characterised himself as a "thrill seeker" on the roads who liked to speed, and admitted to driving from Adelaide to Melbourne in six hours.

Driver's final moments recorded on dash cam

Justice Peek said Colbert also told the psychologist that he once did the 50-kilometre journey from Salisbury in Adelaide's north to Mount Barker in the hills in under 20 minutes.

"A major concern here is that ... you purport to claim a positive right to drive however fast you like," Justice Peek said.

"Such driving is only performed with a high level of danger to members of the public who might emerge in the path of your vehicle."


The final moments of Mr Brimson's life were recorded by a dash board camera in the truck.

The judge read out his final words before the vehicle crashed into the pole.

"Oh [expletive] brakes," Mr Brimson said.

"Where am I gonna [expletive] go.

"I've got nowhere to [expletive] go."

Colbert took over the Green Fields trucking company in January 2014 after its previous owner went bankrupt.

Before that, Colbert worked as a driver in the same truck involved in the fatal collision.

The court heard the truck was used five days a week and had clocked up more than 800,000 kilometres by the time of Mr Brimson's death.

Colbert jailed for previous offences

Colbert was jailed for nine years in 1998 for the rape, attempted rape and gross indecency of two women.

The court heard in both offences Colbert approached the women in public and threatened them with a bladed weapon.

He received a two month suspended sentence for driving offences in 2012.

Justice Peek said there was a troubling theme common to Colbert's past and present offending.

"[That is] of a lack of concern on your part for the effects that your conduct will have on other people," he said.

Colbert stood slumped in the dock and stared at the floor during the sentencing, and showed little emotion.

The sentence comes with a non-parole period of 10 years.

Colbert has been banned from driving until further court order.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Full Noise

Doesn’t matter what the penalties are for cutting a phone line in the CBD. You are comparing apples with oranges.

The funny thing that you’ve brought up is that you think that speeding is dangerous, yet an error with your paperwork isn’t. Welcome to our world.

What would you consider more dangerous?
A. A truck driver making a mistake in his log book, or
B. A car travelling through a red light.

Any reasonable person would say B. So why is the penalty for the truck driver making a mistake in his log book double that of the car that ran the red light?
How would you like it if a copper randomly stopped you on the side of the road in your car and demanded to see your work records for the last three months? Then how would you like it if he found that two months ago, you didn’t have a lunch break and in the same week you worked 15 minutes overtime. Not much of a big deal unless you are a truck driver.

Well, if you were a truck driver, you’ve just kissed goodbye to the best part of $1500. Still seem fair? What if you’ve made a mistake calculating your hours or you’ve simply forgotten to sign a page?

What was that, the copper took an instant dislike to you, really? Well he just decided that the matter will be heard by a magistrate with the possibility of a $4000 maximum - per offence.

You people who know very little about the transport industry crack me up.

First of all. This is the national fatigue law. Have a read of this, should only take about three minutes to read and fully understand. Then imagine how YOU would apply this to YOUR working day.

https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/L...avyVehFMNR.pdf

Now for some light reading…

http://www.criminallawyers.net.au/he...ximum-penalty/

Take a chill pill....you read my comment Wrong.....re read without whatever silly bias was in your head. I was supporting the fact that silly fines for little paperwork stuff ups were so bad! And speeding trucks is not fine.....

[aussiblue]

https://www.fullyloaded.com.au/indus...or-second-time

Adelaide transport operator's gross negligence over driver’s death reaffirmed on appeal

Colbert found guilty of manslaughter for second time

The sentence is the same as that handed down after the first trial last year.

The owner of a South Australian transport company Colbert Transport has been found guilty of manslaughter for the second time over a driver’s death.

According to media reports, a jury took under an hour to unanimously find Peter Colbert guilty of gross negligence over the death of driver Robert Brimson in 2014.

The 45-year-old driver lost his life when his truck veered off the road and crashed into a pole in Happy Valley, a suburb in Adelaide south.

Colbert was found guilty of endangering Brimson, who had warned Colbert about the faulty brakes in the truck two days before the fatal crash, the ABC reports.

It says Colbert denied having prior knowledge of the braking issue during the trial despite witnesses telling the court he was repeatedly warned about the problem.

Colbert was also found guilty of endangering the life of another driver, who is said to have had a near miss owing to faulty brakes.

Colbert, who was sentenced to 12 years in prison last year in the same case, had won an appeal against the conviction in February this year.

The appeals court had found that the trial court judge’s summing of the case was unbalanced and the jurors needed further directions in the case.

The judges ruled that some of the comments in the summation were highly damaging to the defence case.

Colbert will remain in custody until his next court appearance later this month.

The case highlights that vehicle maintenance is legally part of operator liabilities, despite maintenance being outside of the existing chain of responsibility (CoR) rules under the National Heavy Vehicle Law (NHVL).

Holding Redlich partner and transport lawyer Danella Wilmshurst had earlier warned that "it is not an adequate response for a director of a company to delegate full responsibility for vehicle safety to a mechanic or others with a responsibility for vehicle maintenance".

The case also highlights the relevance of the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR’s) ongoing roadworthiness survey that includes inspection of up to 9,000 heavy vehicles – a move aimed at understanding the health status of Australia's existing fleet.

The results of the National Roadworthiness Baseline Survey (NRBS) will help the regulator devise safety and compliance strategies for the future.

[aussiblue]

https://www.fullyloaded.com.au/indus...ver-death-case

Reduced sentence for Colbert in driver death case

Date: 12.10.2016


Peter Colbert will spend at least seven and a half years in prison for being guilty of manslaughter



Adelaide trucking company boss Peter Colbert’s sentence has been reduced to 10 years during the final resentencing on Tuesday.

South Australian Supreme Court sentenced Colbert to 10 years and six months jail with a non-parole period of seven years and five months, commencing from September 2016.

Colbert was twice found guilty of manslaughter of employee Robert Brimson and for endangering another driver’s life.

Brimson lost his life when his truck veered off the road and crashed into a pole in Happy Valley, a suburb in Adelaide south.

During the sentence hearing this week, Justice Malcolm Blue found Colbert guilty of the two crimes after failing to heed warnings that his truck had faulty brakes.

The judge described Colbert’s negligence as "the culmination of a course of conduct over two months" which left one driver dead and another suffering psychological ramifications.

The Colbert Transport boss was earlier sentenced to 12 years in prison in the same case, but had won an appeal against the conviction in February this year.

The appeals court had found that the trial court judge’s summing of the case was unbalanced and the jurors needed further directions in the case

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

You should try it at an extra 30-50kmh over like we used to do before they took all the fun out of driving, by inventing stuff like radar, divided roads ABS etc

That extra 30-50kph over the limit equates to a lot of time saved and time is money isn't it? Never been booked in suburbia as there is no time advantage, but I've never obeyed the open highway speed limit and have paid hugely for it by way of fines, with no remorse. However, tried obeying the law for once just did the Hume from Syd to Melb at the legal limit, and it is extremely draining to watch the miles roll by in slow motion at 110kph. I really sympathise with those who have to do this for a living... 110kph was relevant back in the 70s when people drove Kingswoods and XY's with drum brakes Now the average decent car could probably accelerate, brake and corner faster than a 70s supercar.

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by malazn mafia

That extra 30-50kph over the limit equates to a lot of time saved and time is money isn't it? Never been booked in suburbia as there is no time advantage, but I've never obeyed the open highway speed limit and have paid hugely for it by way of fines, with no remorse. However, tried obeying the law for once just did the Hume from Syd to Melb at the legal limit, and it is extremely draining to watch the miles roll by in slow motion at 110kph. I really sympathise with those who have to do this for a living... 110kph was relevant back in the 70s when people drove Kingswoods and XY's with drum brakes Now the average decent car could probably accelerate, brake and corner faster than a 70s supercar.

I agree to a point. Today's cars are capable of easily and relatively safely cruising at 150km/h on good roads. I have also driven in the NT with no speed limits and can see why it works for them. There is very little traffic and there's also not much to hit if you do leave the road. There roads are also better and generally flat and straight.
However, I don't think open limits would work on busy highways like the Hume. There is simply too much traffic and the road conditions can be poor. Sure our modern cars can do it easily but the problem is the closing speed on slow moving traffic. Closing in on a car traveling 80km/h slower than you requires some attention to be paid and not everyone is paying attention.
I would like to see a moderate increase on the Hume to 130km/h. I think that would work.