Pages

Friday, February 18, 2011

Virginia Hauling Permits: Permit Terms Violations

Jeffrey E. Cox, Esq.

    As I have noted in a previous post, “Virginia Hauling Permits: The Fine Print Could Cost You” (December 10, 2010), the fine print on Virginia hauling permits contains important terms motor carriers need to read carefully. This post addresses the penalties for a violation of the terms of a hauling permit.

    Virginia’s law enforcement will sometimes improperly invalidate a motor carrier’s hauling permit if they find the motor carrier has violated a term in the permit. However, under the Virginia Code and the Virginia Hauling Permit Manual published by the Department of Motor Vehicles permit invalidation is frequently not the appropriate sanction.

    To illustrate, consider the following case our firm defended. A motor carrier was hired to transport a large refrigeration unit from a Norfolk naval base to its manufacturer in Pennsylvania. The carrier obtained a permit that would allow it to transport 100,000 pounds. The carrier had transported similar units along the same route in the past and its drivers knew to ensure all the water had been drained out of the unit before it was loaded on the truck. On this occasion the driver forgot to check to see if the water was drained. The shipment had a total weight of 101,540 pounds, 1,540 pounds over the weight it was permitted to transport. When the carrier was stopped at a weigh station and the oversight discovered, the State Trooper invalidated the hauling permit. In computing the citation he charged the carrier for every pound over the 80,000 pound max weight trucks can carry in Virginia without a permit resulting in a $21,500 fine.     

    In this case, the Trooper’s actions were improper. Virginia law does not allow him to invalidate the underlying hauling permit when computing the sanction. See Virginia Code § 46.2-1139(D). If a police officer discovers a carrier has violated a term in its hauling permit, the officer may invalidate the weight allowed under the permit only if the carrier is: (1) operating off the permitted route (2) the vehicle has fewer axles than required by the permit (3) the vehicle has less axle spacing than what is required by the permit and (4) the vehicle is transporting multiple items not allowed by the permit.
Carrying more weight than is allowed under the permit is a breach of the terms of the permit, but not one that allows an officer to invalidate the underlying hauling permit. In the case of the overweight refrigeration unit above, the appropriate sanction would have been to fine the motor carrier for the difference between its vehicle’s actual weight and the weight allowed under its permit or the officer could have detained the vehicle until it met its permitted weight.  

Another example is a carrier who contacted us after receiving a $30,000 citation. This carrier was transporting an overweight shipment through Virginia and had purchased a hauling permit to allow it to transport 136,000 pounds. The permit terms mandated that the carrier have escorts for part of its journey. The carrier stayed on the route mandated by the permit, but failed to hire escorts and was stopped by a State Trooper who noticed the deficiency. The large amount of the citation was due to the officer invalidating the weight the carrier was allowed to transport under the permit for its failure to comply with the permit terms. Under Virginia Code §46.2-1139(D) the citation penalty was improper, because the carrier’s violation was not one of the four specified exceptions.  

The Virginia Administrative Code also addresses this issue, specifically 24 VAC 20-81-230(D). This section restates the rules specified in § 46.2-1139(D), but states what an officer may do if he finds a violation of a permit term that is not one of the four exceptions:

“Law-enforcement officials or weight-enforcement officials may direct the vehicle to a safe location, at the permittee’s expense, and detain the vehicle configuration until it meets all the requirements of the hauling permit or until a new hauling permit is issued if the vehicle is not [1] traveling with escorts as required by the permit; [2] if the vehicle is traveling outside the hours specified within the permit; [3] if the vehicle is traveling outside the hours specified within the permit; [4] if the driver does not have the entire permit in the vehicle; [5] if the hauling permit has been invalidated or confiscated due to one of the conditions listed in subsection C of this section; [6] if the vehicle is over the permitted weight; [7] or if law enforcement deems the vehicle to be violating any safety requirement.” 24 VAC 20-81-230 (D).

Virginia police officers may not be able to invalidate a hauling permit for the violation of its terms, but they can inflict serious expense on a motor carrier by holding it in place until its vehicle and shipment is in compliance.

    Motor carriers need to ensure that they closely read all the terms and conditions listed on any Virginia hauling permit issued to them. As the two cases discussed illustrate,the potential penalties for not doing so are serious. If your company has received a citation, contact us. Our firm has the knowledge and experience to defend you.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Virginia Hauling Permits: The Fine Print Could Cost You

            Recently, we have had two clients who both received overweight citations despite having valid Virginia hauling permits. Both motor carriers failed to carefully read the large amount of fine print attached to the permit and made mistakes which resulted in costs which could have been avoided.

            The first motor carrier failed to note that Virginia Hauling Permits only apply to state roads and do not allow a motor carrier to travel on roads owned by a county or other local municipality. The carrier was stopped two blocks from its destination because it failed to obtain a permit from the city of Portsmouth for the oversized and overweight farm machinery it was delivering.

            The second motor carrier was traveling on its designated route but failed to note the structure restrictions listed on the permit and allegedly crossed two bridges on I-66 without a proper escort. The carrier was stopped and received a citation from a Virginia State Trooper.

            Frequently, police officers will issue overweight and oversized citations to the driver and not to the motor carrier. Overweight and oversized violations are class one misdemeanors in Virginia which means that unless a compromise is worked out beforehand, the driver must appear on the hearing date. This places logistical and monetary costs on a motor carrier to route its driver back to Virginia for the hearing in addition to legal fees for the defense.

            I was able to successfully defend both motor carriers from the citations they received, but both tickets could have been avoided if the carriers had taken the time to read the permit carefully. If you are planning an oversized or overweight move in Virginia, please ensure you read the fine print on the Hauling Permit as well as the terms of the Virginia Hauling Permit Manual which can be found on the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicle’s website at:


If you have received an overweight or oversized citation in Virginia our firm has the experience needed to defend you, contact us today!

Sincerely,
Jeffrey E. Cox, Esq.

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Vicarious Liability: Why The FMCSA Is The Ultimate Judge Of Highway Safety

Please see the following link for the article "Vicarious Liability: Why The FMCSA Is The Ultimate Judge Of Highway Safety " published in the Transportation Lawyers Association October 2010.

http://transportationlaw.net/articles/Vicarious%20Liability-TTL_October_2010.pdf

It is also available on our website at http://transportationlaw.net/articles.html

Yours truly,
Henry E. Seaton, Esq.

Monday, September 20, 2010

"Can An Unlicensed Broker Recover Commissions From A Motor Carrier?" By Ronald H. Usem, Esq.


Please see the following article titled "Can An Unlicensed Broker Recover Commissions From A Motor Carrier?"  by Ronald H. Usem, Esq. Huffman, Usem, Saboe, Crawford & Greenberg, PA The Logistics Journal, August 2010.

This article discusses the case litigated on appeal by Henry Seaton.

Monday, August 23, 2010

This Morning-Hank Seaton on XM 171 Discussing CSA 2010

Today from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. EST, Hank Seaton and Rick Gobbell will be featured on XM 171 - The Road Dog Show, speaking about "Safety and Common Sense - Why Second Guessing the FMCSA under CSA 2010 Should not be Required."