You’re going to tow my truck where?

[Streakn1]

The rule you'd have violated would be the 10 hr consecutive sleeper berth [and even that can be done, if it's been at least 8 hrs, without losing time accumulated]. Your wife could have handed him the requested items, to avoid the problem.

At the time of the traffic stop I had only been in the sleeper berth two hours.

The driver can refuse to provide the co-drivers documents if they choose. They cannot legally be forced to go into the clothing one is wearing while they are sleeping to obtain a drivers license, medical card, or logbook. During a stop they only have reasonable access to the co-drivers items without a warrant if those items are in the sleeper berth with the driver.

 

[Streakn1]

You could have fought that and won, as you would have been violating no rule, it would have just screwed up your 10. If you look through section 395, there's no wording at all that limits bottom line time, just driving. Not that I could find...

Your probably right and I may in fact be in error on the 14hr rule and how it affects duty not driving time. I just did a quick phone pole amongst our fellow driver friends and found it almost 50/50 as to those whom interpret it as I do and others that believe as you. Now I'm confused. Tried to link the support data to the rule that I was going by but having trouble doing so.

Obviously being a team truck for over ten years now this is not an issue for us and I've all but forgotten what its like to run under the HOS rules as a solo. I do plan to get with our safety director next week for her interpretation and company policies regarding this.

Ya gotta remember, I'm on some serious pain killers since the accident and just a bit confused right now! LOL

 

[cheri1122]

Streak: Highway star is correct: after working 14 hrs, one may not DRIVE until taking 10 hrs off, but one can certainly continue to work.
What the LEO asked of you would have interrupted the 10 hrs - and your wife could have refused to provide the requested items on your behalf, but what purpose would that serve? It would most likely cause suspicion [that your documents may not bear scrutiny] where there wasn't any before - I can't see why that would be a smart thing to do....

 

[x06col]

No laws were broken. That was the point of this thread. Everything was done by the book and it still turned into mess.

Well....now you know. Maybe jes go to Wally, unplug the link, turn off the phone, get some sleep till the appointed time. Then, deliver. You'd saved towing fees, loss of sleep and this thread. You'd still get the awww crap letter you are going to get, but...you still could have done the deal and had a nap. I'm personnaly not believing this over a couple miles after a rest period. Me and fedup didn't get along 16 years ago.....can't imagine how long i'd last now. Stewpid stuff!!!!

 

[Moot]

Maybe jes go to Wally, unplug the link, turn off the phone, get some sleep till the appointed time. Then, deliver.

Unplug the link way before you get to WallyWorld to avoid giving up your position.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Unplug the link way before you get to WallyWorld to avoid giving up your position.

Something tells me that is a termination issue.....provided they could or even want to know if it was on purpose or not...

 

[x06col]

Personnaly, termination would be a non-issue for me, if, i'd have experienced that kind of foolishness and assinine expense.......cause i'd a been the terminator.

 

[JimF51]

Although I didn't have any situation like the original poster's, I had enough similar ones in the year with FedEx, along with the baby sitting and hand holding (hand cuffing?), that prompted me to leave.

One can only take so much

 

[davekc]

This is exactly what happens when carriers hire seven dollar an hour high school dispatchers.
The carrier likely through your contract has unfettered access to the freight at all times. That is much different than towing your vehicle. That can only be done if YOU authorize it.
I would never let the carrier tow a vehicle unless I wanted it towed and I set up the tow.
The carrier negotiates nothing. They just want their freight moved.
They could care less what it costs the contractor.

 

[moose]

If you are out of hours and sitting in a truck stop parking lot, and for some reason the lot becomes unsafe and you can no longer park there, you can move the truck to a safe place. .

This is news to me.
can someone please post a link to the actual reg. ?

 

[layoutshooter]

If a lot becomes unsafe, I am moving, regs or no regs. I don't need a reg to tell me when it is time to get the heck out of Dodge! I do realize that this IS the government and it IS THEIR regs, but common sense will prevail.

 

[moose]

I wonder what the actual HOS regs say about it. I guess the Fed and I would have a problem if they imposed their own HOS regs over and above the actual regs.

this is not the problem *.
the problem, like I'v stated here a few times before, is that some ATA carriers are throwing the drivers under the bus, by using the lame excuse of EOBR's to allow drivers to drive the truck, when HOS regs. stating clear they are not allow to do so. the DoT, might look the other way... might...
so far ambulance chasers did not catches up to this gold mind, but they will.

* if the carrier allow me to drive WAY less then what i allow by law, i can care less,
as long as the paycheck reflect what i could have made.
i'd actually prefer it to be that way, if all possible .

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Streak: Highway star is correct: after working 14 hrs, one may not DRIVE until taking 10 hrs off, but one can certainly continue to work.
What the LEO asked of you would have interrupted the 10 hrs - and your wife could have refused to provide the requested items on your behalf, but what purpose would that serve? It would most likely cause suspicion [that your documents may not bear scrutiny] where there wasn't any before - I can't see why that would be a smart thing to do....

This brings back another episode of LEOs interrupting time off. I remember people complaining KY police knocking on the doors of trucks parked at truck stops in order to do inspections.

What is your opinion of that circumstance, Cheri? Should a driver always do what the officer tells him, so as not to raise suspicion? There is a difference between suspicion and reasonable suspicion. In order to have reasonable suspicion to yank someone out of their bunk, there has to be more than a driver telling a cop to kiss off.

If I am not in the driver's seat, or doing DOT regulation stuff (pre-trip), an LEO cannot LEGALLY tell me a damm thing if I am not on the clock, unless it's in regards to my well-being, or a crime has been committed.

With regards to a team, I have never been asked to come out of the sleeper. Nor has my co-driver. I have been asked to give his drivers license. Fine. I'm not one to rock the boat, if something REASONABLE has been asked. But yanking someone out of the bunk for nothing is not reasonable.

 

[layoutshooter]

Yanking some one out of their bunk is assault. Entering a sleeper without a warrant is a home invasion. ANYONE invading MY home, the "fixed" home in Michigan or my mobile home, is subject to what ever means I have available to me to stop them. NO HOLDS BARRED!! ASK me to look in my sleeper and I may or may not allow you to do so. NEVER try to use force. Force will be met by force in return.

 

[Streakn1]

NO HOLDS BARRED!! ASK me to look in my sleeper and I may or may not allow you to do so. NEVER try to use force. Force will be met by force in return.

A MAN after my own heart! God help the LEO that EVER steps into my sleeper uninvited and without reasonable cause while my wife or myself is in the bunk on sleeper berth time. If its a fight they want, its a NASTY fight they will get, to the end!

 

[greg334]

A MAN after my own heart! God help the LEO that EVER steps into my sleeper uninvited and without reasonable cause while my wife or myself is in the bunk on sleeper berth time. If its a fight they want, its a NASTY fight they will get, to the end!

SO I asked this of Layout but I am going to ask again to you streak, if you are at an airport or a military base, they don't seem to ask but tell you, so how do you handle that?

 

[Streakn1]

SO I asked this of Layout but I am going to ask again to you streak, if you are at an airport or a military base, they don't seem to ask but tell you, so how do you handle that?

Good question Gregg and I've got a great answer for ya: I stated "uninvited and without reasonable cause" being the reason any LEO will be met with a nasty fight. The difference for us when entering airports, military bases, or any of the customers we service with sercurity gates/personnel is while on their property whomever is in the sleeper berth on their 10 hr sleeper break is awake and dressed. Typically that person is dressed prior to our arrival at their facility. This allows the customer's security to search our truck "invited". Part of our job and is done routinely.

Now for the "Buck with a badge" not at a customer of ours that chooses to pull us over, approach us at a rest area, pull us into a scale and without reasonable cause which equal uninvited be forewarned, walk into our sleeper while either of us is asleep in bed especially naked be prepared for that nasty fight. I have a right to protect myself and my wife has a right to feel he was attempting to rape her. Bad move on BUCKO's part!!! Cops have been convicted of attempted rape of the female they pulled over for a "routine traffic check" and some deserved it!!!

LEO is not always correct in their actions towards the general public and don't always interpret the laws they enforce correctly. Prime example: spoke with an FHP trooper yesterday at the Petro in Reddick, Fl while checking on our truck. Asked about the 14 hour rule as has been discussed in this thread. He said I was absolutely correct in how I have interpreted how the rule applies to "on duty driving" and "on duty not driving" and the 14 hr clock, yet the majority on this thread disagrees. So do we have a misinformed trooper writing logbook tickets?

 

[cheri1122]

This brings back another episode of LEOs interrupting time off. I remember people complaining KY police knocking on the doors of trucks parked at truck stops in order to do inspections.

What is your opinion of that circumstance, Cheri? Should a driver always do what the officer tells him, so as not to raise suspicion? There is a difference between suspicion and reasonable suspicion. In order to have reasonable suspicion to yank someone out of their bunk, there has to be more than a driver telling a cop to kiss off.

I thought the reason for the driver to hand the LEO the requested items pertaining to sleeping codriver was to avoid interrupting his/her sleeper berth period - seems easier to me than refusing.
I've never been asked to interrupt the sleeper time, but I think if I were, I'd probably comply. Because we all know that if the LEO decides to, he can really ruin your day. It may not be right, [or legal], and you may even be able to force him to admit it in a court of law, years later, but at what expense?
Having said that, there are days when principle seems more important than cost, and on those days, I might stand on my right to remain lying down.

If I am not in the driver's seat, or doing DOT regulation stuff (pre-trip), an LEO cannot LEGALLY tell me a damm thing if I am not on the clock, unless it's in regards to my well-being, or a crime has been committed.

With regards to a team, I have never been asked to come out of the sleeper. Nor has my co-driver. I have been asked to give his drivers license. Fine. I'm not one to rock the boat, if something REASONABLE has been asked. But yanking someone out of the bunk for nothing is not reasonable.

 

[Turtle]

Yanking some one out of their bunk is assault. Entering a sleeper without a warrant is a home invasion. ANYONE invading MY home, the "fixed" home in Michigan or my mobile home, is subject to what ever means I have available to me to stop them. NO HOLDS BARRED!! ASK me to look in my sleeper and I may or may not allow you to do so. NEVER try to use force. Force will be met by force in return.

Don't try that in Illinois, as the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled otherwise, even in cases of unlawful entry by the police. Is that fupped, or what?

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Amazing..freakin amazing.....every thread every post the same 'EXCUSE".....not worth the cost of fighting in court....

ya ever think that is the EXACT reason we have this growing police state mentality....NO one is standing up to them! Oh yeah same old excuse...the cost = MONEY....well FREEDOM from oppression is NOT free.......our troops are putting their lives on the line for our freedom and you here at home are giving away the freedoms that they are fighting for.....TAKE a stand for crying out loud.....