Discussion in 'RLC' started by overedassaultmode, Jan 13, 2007.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Anyone know what section of the MML does a vehicle park reversing accident come under
Depends on the drivers standing orders, Regimental SOIs etc. Ususally it is failing to follow orders, sorry I can't remember the section.
Most mil reversing should be guided, if the driver was being guided the accident is deemed to be the guides fault, if he was not being guided in most cases he (or she) is breaking drivers standing orders etc. Give me a bit of time and I will check with my old chief clerk what the relevent sections of the AA are?
Drivers standing orders in JSP 341 state that you should not reversed un guided, thats should not. Not must not.
Your unit SOI's may differ, however charging someone for an "accident" is not necessarily the way ahead these days.
Its all gone fluffy with councelling etc. Your DRSA is the person you should speak to in regard to his Accident Investigation Report.
negligence and proper care, can't remember the exact bit, but you will almost certainly be found guilty and expect to cough up some cash.
expect a fine and a repayment charge.
Amount of fine is upto your OC, but won't be excessive, repayment charge normally around 10% of cost of damage upto a cap of x days wages....can't rember exact details.
if an individual has caused many Â£0000s of damage to say a DROPS, total would be in the region of Â£400.....but obviously, every case is different
There is no specific section within the MML that makes an reversing accident a punishable offence, but the sections you are likely to be charged under are:
69 Conduct to prejudice of military discipline
Any person subject to military law who is guilty[, whether by any act or omission or otherwise, of conduct] to the prejudice of good order and military discipline shall, on conviction by court-martial, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or any less punishment provided by this Act.
70 Civil offences
(1) Any person subject to military law who commits a civil offence, whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, shall be guilty of an offence against this section.
(2) In this Act the expression civil offence means any act or omission punishable by the law of England or which, if committed in England, would be punishable by that law; and in this Act the expression the orresponding civil offence means the civil offence the commission of which constitutes the offence against this section.
Bottleosmoke is on the money here, to charge someone for an reversing accident is perhaps not the best way forward, it is frought with avenues for appeal/redress etc.
If we take this down the AGAI route how does the money get recouped from the DR. I was looking at possible disobedience to standing orders, as he has signed to say he has read and understood DVR standing orders(JSP). What ja reckon?
That has worked in the past - the only drama with summary dealing these days is the individual being charged cannot incriminate himself therefore you need to have witnesses who:
a. Saw the accident.
b. Can confirm he was not being guided.
The going rate is about 10% of the damage done but it is far trickier to charge those responsible for an accident than it used to be. If there are no witnesses then the AGAI route is the way to go as the burden of proof is 'on the balance of probability' rather than 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. This does not allow you to get money off the individual but may go some way to providing a detterant in the future.
If the guy/girl has a history of RTAs you may be able to look at the removal of his FMT 600 due to health and safety concerns and then potentially removing trade pay (if he/she is a driver). This is pretty drastic and usually only needs to be threatened for driving standards to improve. Your Bde Master Driver should be able to help.
Well dont quote JSP 341 because as I said it doesnt state that a dvr must not reverse unaided. I think it states that where possible the dvr should be guided.
It does state that if found responsible the driver must undergo remedial training, eyesight test etc.
Summary dealing for an RTI/RTA is fraught with pitfalls.
I myself have an officer here that caused 3 grands worth of damage to a hire vehicle whilst reversing at speed at STANTA. The best I can hope for is a disciplinary interview with CO.
Where is the "going rate" laid down and by whom?
It is not laid down by anybody.
It is a start point which can be adjusted depending on the circumstances of the case, ie increased for someone who has a history or reduced (or even turned into an adminishment) if the individual concerned has demonstrated remorse and is in all other respects an excellent soldier.
If the point you are trying to make is that each case should be judged on merit that would be correct but 10% is not a bad starter for 10!
Like BT80 said - you cannot get the money from AGAI action, in any event, has he broken the service test (I don't know he has or not, it would depend on how many vehicles the Unit had, could they be easily replaced, has the soldier done it before etc).
As for the disobedience to standing orders - I suppose at a stretch you could do that, it would depend on how much you wanted to punish him. Additionally you would need to prove that he had read them - have you still got the slip of paper that we all are supposed to sign to say that we have read them.
Lastly, you need to be clear on the reason that you are punishing him (to avoid comebacks etc). If the underlying reason is punishment, retribution, detterence or to claw back some money by fines - then go the MML route, if it is an employment matter i.e. negligence/incompetence (for instance a reasonable and competent driver would have got a guide) then it is the AGAI route.
Just be sure in your own mind - because whilst it might appear that AGAI action gives power back to the NCO - that power has always actually been there. What is does is give the guilty party a stick to beat you with if you get it wrong.
Thanks for your views fellas, im sure this will be squared away next week.
What the feck happened to simplicity, feckin everyone new were they stood and RTAs and such like were never a drama to sweep up!!
When you sign the work ticket it actually says "I have read and understood standing orders for drivers".
JSP 341 has a set of generic Drivers Standing orders that are to be adapted to individual units.
Any person driving military vehs in a unit is required to sign to say he has read and understood them. Amongst other places this information SHOULD be kept on a soldiers records (P file). This is part of an LSI inspection and should be checked by the master driver.
As well as the above if type of vehicle is on a soldiers FMT 600 there should be record of familiarisation on his file, whether that be the GS driver package at Leconfield or in unit Fam Trg carried out by a DLAI or a GS Driving Instr (In the Regs, Class 1 soldiers are no longer authorised to carry out Fam Trg).
If there is a need for a BOI after an RTA the investigators will check that the soldier has been famed on the vehicle and who signed his FMT 600, the unit must keep a register of all FMT 600 issued, and the person who authorises the FMT600 will be held accountable.
The above is slightly off topic, however, if a soldier causes an accident by reversing (or any accident), as stated, the unit DRSA will carry out an investigation and is in a position to advise on remedial action.
Separate names with a comma.