Weight Restricted Roads - It doesn't apply to me (Does it?)

[The Landy]

Weight restricted roads are appearing with increasing frequency and I believe this is a potential trap for many driving some of the more popular 4WD vehicles on the market these days...

I put some thoughts on the topic in a blog on our website recently and you can read more about it here.

thelandy.com/2019/03/04/weight-restricted-roads-it-doesnt-apply-to-me-does-it

Like they say, a problem is never a problem, until it becomes one; this has all the hallmarks of a problem lying dormant and ready to catch people out.



Cheers, Baz - The Landy

[DavidCee]

Hell Baz,
The sign you have depicted in your article is a 'No trucks' sign, with a limit. Road Rule 104 applies to this. When you look up the definition of a truck it is a vehicle primarily designed for the carriage of goods. Therefore caravanners have nothing to worry about with those signs.
The only signs that relate to caravanners are weight limit signs under section 252 of the Road Safety Vehicle Regulations. Such signs are usually found on older wooden bridges and apply to all vehicles -And natuurally one would be wise to heed those signs..

[The Landy]

Hi

In my research I canvassed the local government authority responsible for the sign and they indicated "all vehicles" not just trucks.  This is where it is misleading.  Mind you, I hope you are right, however I suspect my interpretation is correct.

Thanks for your input, Cheers, Baz

[DavidCee]

Local government cannot override legislation...

[The Landy]

Local government cannot override legislation...

Hi David, RMS are quite clear on the issue as I canvassed this with them once again, if your "vehicle" is over the weight limit specified then you are prohibited from using it as a through road.

Noting, the RMS approve all road signage, whether it is on a local access (local government) road or otherwise.

As I've indicated, I'm happy to be wrong on this, but as I highlighted in my original article, there is plenty of ambiguity over the issue, as our discussion highlights.

I'll give a couple of examples; there are roads that are weight limited by GVM (3T) without a picture of a truck.  Also, there are plenty of "vehicles" out there that look like "trucks" (Small Isuzu's and the like) depicted in the picture that are registered in the light vehicle category (under 4,500kg GVM) but weight more than 3,000kg. In the case of the latter, they are considered light vehicles, similar to your Landcruiser and Nissans.

On ambiguity, it usually means that if you have an accident whilst non-compliant on these roads then it will most likely cost you money to prosecute your case and ability to make a claim, especially given the RMS also interpret the rule in this way.

Now, if there was an arbiter in this, it would be my insurance company and they were quite explicit, if you aren't entitled to be there we "may" refuse a claim. For this reason, I will avoid weight restricted roads as best I can, as I don't want to be in the position of trying to defend a claim, or worse...

I doubt the local government authority will be over-riding legislation, it will be covered...

The main thing for all is to be aware this is a (potential) problem, forewarned is forearmed - and best people do there own due diligence, which is what I have done and shared my findings.


Cheers, Baz

[DavidCee]

 Hello Baz,
It appears to me that you may be confusing registration categories with the definition of a truck in the Road Rules.
To be clear:
A weight limit sign with no picture applies to all vehicles.
A weight limit sign with a picture of a truck means no trucks over that weight. The definition of a truck in the Road Rules is a light rigid vehicle designed for the carriage of goods and does Not include other vehicles with a gvm of up to 4.5 tons.
4x4 wagon or twin cab ute towing - not a truck:
Light isuzu truck towing - a truck:
ISUZU truck converted to earth cruiser - now you have a discussion. It is over 3 tons, but is it now designed for the carriage of goods?
DC

[The Landy]

Hi David

Our exchange highlights how this issue is a trap, is ambiguous, and something not to be dismissed lightly.

A sign with or without a truck has the same meaning - if you are over the weight specified you cannot use that road as a through road. 

The picture of the truck is only symbolic. This has been confirmed to me numerous times by both Local Government and the RMS.

In reality, if your vehicle's tare weight is under 3T the local government authority is unlikely to take any action if you are travelling on a weight restricted road of 3T, even if your loaded weight is above 3T as they will refer to the vehicle's registered tare weight. However, your insurance company may deal with it differently in case of an accident, and the police, should there be serious injury in the event of an accident.

As I said in my article, ambiguity in legal matters generally means a cost to you, especially if you are required to defend your actions or challenge an insurance rejection.

But, forewarned is forearmed, hopefully it stimulates discussion, and alerts others to the 'potential' pitfall that exists.

I'd encourage you to do your own due diligence if you have a further interest in the topic - I'm not here to convince you one way or the other - only to highlight the potential issue.

Cheers, Baz

[DavidCee]

Hello Baz,
Yes, we can agree to disagree. I base my view on 30 years of Road Policing.

[The Landy]

As a follow-up to the discussion. 

The following sign has appeared not too far from where I live and highlights the issue I have raised. Whilst it shows a "truck" picture, perhaps leading many to believe it does not apply to something that isn't a truck, the sign clearly says "vehicles". So if you are driving a Nissan Patrol, Toyota Landcruiser or similar sized vehicles you are restricted in the way you can use this road.

As I have asserted in my article and confirmed with both local council and the NSW RMS (verbally) the picture of the truck is  only symbolic. If you are over 3 ton (or 3 ton GVM) it applies.

Some time ago I wrote to the NSW RMS via our local State Member of Parliament for clarification of the meaning of these signs given the ambiguity which has been highlighted in the responses I have received from others, and evidenced in responses to this post. I'm still waiting for a more formal response.

Cheers, Baz

[Gumb]

In reality, if your vehicle's tare weight is under 3T the local government authority is unlikely to take any action if you are travelling on a weight restricted road of 3T, even if your loaded weight is above 3T as they will refer to the vehicle's registered tare weight.

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion, the sign clearly states GVM.

[The Landy]

I'm not sure how you get to that conclusion, the sign clearly states GVM.

Hi Gumb,

If you read the article via the link in my initial post the reference you highlight will be clear.  It would appear you have just read the comments above, without the benefit of the full article. (Full article can be found here. https://thelandy.com/2019/03/04/weight-restricted-roads-it-doesnt-apply-to-me-does-it/

There are different signs, some simply state over 3t, others have the inclusion of "GVM".

Here is the example I was referring to and is shown in the original article.  The GVM sign I posted above is a variation of this type of signage.  The bottom line is if you have a vehicle (read 4WD) that weights in excess of 3,000kg (3T) or a GVM in excess of 3,000kg you are affected by these restrictions.   And I once again highlight, this is in NSW.



Cheers, Baz - The Landy

[DavidCee]

Hello Baz,
Clearly this is an issue that vexes you, compounded by the theories that these signs are placed by authorities to catch or trap unsuspecting drivers. I would suggest that authorities have more important things to do and more efficient ways of raising funds. The signs you have pictured look to be on local roads and therefore were most likely erected by local councils. So I would suggest your enquiries would be better directed to the council traffic engineers to establish the purpose of the signs. Authorities don't like erecting signs for no reason, they cost money to erect and maintain and too many signs distract from local amenity.
David Cee.

[The Landy]

Hi David

Personally I feel it is an issue that should "vex" us all with 4WDs that increasingly are affected by these restrictions as you are quite right in saying that the authorities don't just put up signs for the sake of it - but as with any directives on our roads, ignore them at your peril.

Importantly, the question needs to be asked, was this restriction ever intended to affect larger 4WD vehicles, and if so, why...?

And despite your suggestion; I have not put forward any theory that the authorities are out to catch unsuspecting drivers as a revenue raising exercise - I'm highlighting that many don't realise it applies to them and that ignoring it may have numerous implications for them, both financial and non-financial.

This new sign highlights the precise issue that we discussed earlier in this thread; it shows a truck, but indicates it applies to "all vehicles". That puts to rest your assertion it applies only to trucks; after all, the 4WDs we are discussing here are classified as a "vehicle".

To your point, these are on local government authority roads, but the RMS approve signage on all roads regardless of who has authority over the road, hence they are a good point of reference. And yes, as I've indicated previously I have discussed with the Local Council and they have confirmed precisely the way I have interpreted the restriction.

As I highlighted from the outset, how people choose to deal with these restrictions is entirely a matter for them, but at least do so in full knowledge of how it applies to your own vehicle.

A review of your posts highlight the very point I have been making, many don't realise it applies to "vehicles" other than just trucks.  The picture of a truck is symbolic only (confirmed verbally by both the RMS and the LGA).

My closing comment to you is simply this, it may never be a problem, you are right on that point and I highly doubt there is a police officer or Council Ranger lying in wait to trap you, but the restriction and directive is there, for whatever reason, and you may find yourself defending your actions if you disregard it - after all the signs have been put there for a reason.

My reason for highlighting this issue is the ambiguity created for drivers by having a picture of a truck in the sign and around how people interpret the sign. I've been motivated to understand the directive and I've been happy to share my findings. Given your experience of 30 years of policing I'm sure we can at least agree on one thing - education and a thorough understanding of your responsibilities when driving is key to a safer outcome on our roads.

Cheers, Baz - The Landy