PARTITION SCREENS:
As you know from the May and June editions of PHTM, both the NPHTA and PHTM have been working tirelessly on the subject of separation screens in saloon vehicles and minibuses in an attempt to protect drivers and the travel- ling public. Let me tell you, it has been no easy task to keep on top of, and indeed to keep our cool over, based on the simple fact that every other walk of life has not only installed these very same screens, but indeed been instructed to do so in order to become “COVID safe”. So why not the travelling public and the drivers of licensed private hire and hackney carriages?
e have been campaigning with MP’s, the Commons Transport
Select Committee, Department for Transport, Department for Health, Department for Business, to each local authority in the land. We have even been dreaming up new ways to campaign in our sleep, this is such a major national topic.
Many local authorities within Wales (including Cardiff) and many within Scotland (including Glasgow and Edinburgh) were “awaiting guidance from Government.” Nevertheless we carried on with our specific campaigns with each, including working with Unite the Union in Cardiff, and Barry Sloan of UPHD in Glasgow, now becom- ing App Drivers & Couriers Union or APDU; months’ worth of emails, MP and councillor involvements, and calls to each of them.
TfL initially released a bulletin adopting a stance of:-
a. The product to be installed is compliant with government and industry regulations, will not compromise the safety of the vehi- cle and is approved by a MIRA (or comparable body) for use in the UK.
b. The product is certified by the vehiclemanufacturer as not com- promising the safety of the vehicle.
Now here is where it gets very interesting, since the Scottish Gov- ernment,Welsh Government and Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) copied and pasted the exact same requirements! So we contacted MIRA for more information on this; the results were shocking to say the least.
“I can confirm that HORIBA MIRA is supporting TfL in the applica- tion of their private hire taxi partition scheme but we are yet to be in a position to assess a vehicle as applicants struggle to find com- pliant screen materials and evidence that other safety systems aren’t impacted.
“We provided input to the requirements set but I must stress that this is very much a TfL scheme; MIRA is providing an independent assessment service where we review vehicles against the TfL requirements and provide a report for TfL to consider. They then decide if the particular installation is accepted.”
So hang on:
1. This is TfL ONLY… no other licensing authority, and certainly not at government level!
2. The test is not ready yet! 3. The report is only against TfL requirements, and may even be rejected by TfL!!
It gets worse: 26
4. I wonder….does TfL also insist on this certificate when insisting on their licensing roundels being installed?
What about the cost of this test?What is it actually testing, for whom, and what is the waiting time? MIRA’S response was:
“I can’t comment on requirements for partition screens in other UK boroughs or councils but I can inform you that we are yet to receive any applications for an assessment from outside of London.
“In terms of prices we charge £2,150 for an inspection to TfL requirements of a compliant screen installed in a vehicle. This is a check that all evidence of compliance for the mate- rial and interaction with airbags is satisfactory and that the way the screen is installed is safe; no sharp edges, secure etc. Under the TfL scheme, an operator could do this on one vehicle, for example a Prius, and then read this across all their Prius fleet.
The £9,500 is an indicative price for testing a flexible screen material to UN ECE R43, not including weathering. This is to prove the compliance of the material, not the installation.”
1. This ONLY applies to TfL, no other licensing authority or region; they have not even had any enquiries from anyone else, not even Scottish or Welsh governments….so why is it “government guidance?” Let’s not forget of course the simple fact that TfL run under a different licensing act fromany other local authority in the UK!
2. Ok, so to test the papers submitted, and have a quick glance that there are no sharp edges £2,150.
3. If the certificates are not presented, then it is £9,500. JULY 2020
“For the TfL scheme we would look for a type approval or a test report to UN ECE R43 proving compliance for thematerial. This rationale is supported by Section 12 of the M1 IVA Manual. Applicants must provide this evidence in advance before pre- senting a vehicle for inspection. This is proving difficult as there aren’t many R43 compliant materials on the market.
“The applicant must also provide evidence in advance of pre- senting the vehicle for inspection that the screen doesn’t impact on airbag performance. Again, this is proving difficult as the trade struggle to get information such as airbag deploy- ment patterns from OEMs. Quite rightly,y TfL are insisting on this as the screens must not interfere with other vehicle safety systems.”
1. So the applicantmust have thematerials inspected and cer- tified independently and produce that certificate to MIRA.
2. The applicant must also contact the vehicle manufacturer to obtain certificates to verify the installation does not interfere with airbags…. notice MIRA know full well this is impossible, as highlighted in red. Note, this is not a dealer- ship or workshop letter, this is direct from the likes of Toyota in Japan!!
3. Vehicle manufacturers do not even issue such certificates when they change the oil, brakes, headlight bulbs or any- thing else they install after manufacture, so they are certainly never going to issue such a certificate of confor- mity to an aftermarket product.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
