Calling all overweight vans

The Caravan Council of Australia is conducting a survey to determine how many caravans have an incorrect empty ball-load figure stamped on the compliance plate.

According to the CCA’s Colin Young (pictured), for whatever reason some manufacturers are putting incorrect ratings on the compulsory compliance plate, with resulting safety and legal implications.

“The biggest number of complaints received by the CCA by far, concerns the ratings and masses of 'vans,” he said. “In many cases, the actual Tare mass is greater then the advised Tare mass.

“Some manufacturers or dealers still believe in, and stamp the trailer (compliance) plate accordingly using the long-held stupid, and potentially-dangerous ‘formula’ that empty ball-loading equals ATM rating minus GTM rating,” Young said.

“Subtracting one rating from another rating, cannot possibly give an actual mass. Changing the original axle, suspension, wheel and tyre system on a 'van to a Kenworth system, to increase the GTM rating, will not cause the ball-loading to change by one iota…”

According to a Ratings and Masses guide on the CCA website,
the ball loading along with the Tare (unloaded) mass of the van can only be measured,
unlike the GTM (Gross Trailer Mass) and ATM (Aggregated Trailer Mass),
which are ratings determined by the manufacturer.

When measured
on a weigh-bridge, the CCA says the ball loading is the difference
between the two readings obtained when the caravan is hitched and
unhitched.

The CCA is asking owners to provide the 'stamped' ratings on their van, including Tare, GTM, ATM and empty ball loading if provided, when different to ‘actual’ ratings obtained from a certified weigh bridge.

The information, which will be provided in strict confidence, can be sent via email to caravancouncil@optusnet.com.au.

Young said he plans to release a "basic summary" of the results as well as inform any offending manufacturers.

"We will release a basic summary of the number of reported instances of incorrect information advised to buyers," he said.

"Manufacturers' names will not be mentioned (but) with a barrister's consent, it is planned to advise 'guilty' manufacturers of the issue."

Young said from his dealings with disgruntled buyers he has "a pretty good understanding already of which manufacturers and importers believe, and use, this idiotic formula".

"If one manufacturer fully understands all of the legal requirements of the ADRs (VSB-1) and the ACL (Australian Consumer Law), along with duty-of-care responsibilities, and manufactures and markets all of their vehicles accordingly… very simply, why can't all manufacturers?"