Adopt and regularly review updated nominal weights for cars and coaches
Sheen Inquiry · Sheen Inquiry — Final Report · Issued 24 July 1987
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The practice of using one metric tonne for the all-up weight of the average car with luggage, fuel, and personal effects, is outmoded. A nominal weight of metric tonnes should be adopted. This figure should be reviewed regularly by the Department on a large random sample basis, say, every five years. Similar considerations apply to coaches, where the current Townsend Thoresen practice of allowing 14 tons per coach should be adopted. It is desirable that the Department should conduct an analysis of coaches, particularly of the long distance double decker type, in order to determine a more accurate basis for the nominal weight. This nominal weight should then be used in making up the cargo predictions. Checks at Dover on over 100 vehicles coming to the United Kingdom showed that on average the actual weight exceeded the declared weight by approximately 13%. It is considered that these checks should be extended, particularly covering the present gap in knowledge of the weight of outgoing vehicles. The checks should not be on the basis of weighing obviously likely vehicles, but on a purely random basis. To avoid criticism of the statistical validity of such checks, a considerable number of vehicles should be covered, say 500 either way. Such numbers, in conjunction with a random choice, should produce a reliable margin for addition to the waybill declaration. Meanwhile we consider that an addition of 13% should be made to declared weights when making up anticipated cargoes. Finally, once a comprehensive weigh bridge system is instituted the Department should review the statistics of declared and actual weights and produce an update of such margins every five years.
Sheen Inquiry, Sheen Inquiry — Final Report · 24 Jul 1987 Source PDF →
Response — verbatim from government
●No formal government response recorded
The Index has not yet recorded a verbatim government response to this recommendation.
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
No published activity has been recorded against this recommendation yet.
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.