A Frame Disaster

[jockaneezer]

I think "Dolly's" can still be used by registered breakdown/recovery companies under specific conditions (distance travelled and speed restrictions ?), but are not for the use of the general public ?
I'm not sure why they are banned for Joe Public, but it might have something to do with them not having any suspension (a bit like Hydratrail bike carriers ?)
Anyhoo, that's another can of worms added to the mix !

 

[Larrynwin]

Please tell me why you aren't asking this of others who have commented but don't A-frame ... like me perhaps? Just because people don't actually A-frame doesn't mean they can't understand the ins and outs of it.

It’s the self professed anti effort that one individual puts into an a frame thread with little or no positive reason or experience of why.
I understand those that out of interest question types, safety, cost etc which has been the case with other posters but negative for the sake of negative is of little help to those that may consider an a frame.

 

[Minxy]

It’s the self professed anti effort that one individual puts into an a frame thread with little or no positive reason or experience of why.
I understand those that out of interest question types, safety, cost etc which has been the case with other posters but negative for the sake of negative is of little help to those that may consider an a frame.

It's call personal opinion ... just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean they don't have the right to have one. He has posted a LOT of information on the subject, whether you like it or not, not by the sounds of it.

You love yours and don't want to lose the ability to use it along with the reasons why (that's 'your opinion') which I understand, but it doesn't mean that I, and others can't have our own views on it.

I agree with a LOT (if not all) of what Tony is saying ... they need to be properly classified and requirements put in place so that they are subject to the same scrutiny as the rest of the car going through an MOT, this would be a good thing as it would ensure that ONLY those which pass are safe to use. The same goes for caravans, or any trailer, I know people won't like that but if it weeds out the ones that are downright dangerous (I'm sure there plenty of the latter) then surely that is preferable to having the dangerous ones continuing to be used?

 

[Conniedriving]

I agree with your last two points but not the first. Whether the breakaway cable applies the brakes in the event of the frame becoming partially or fully detached from the car depends on the type of installation. I think it is true for the over run system but not for the electronic braking systems which usually relies on a switch triggering an actuator which causes the brakes to be applied and stay on until they can be released.
ezee

Harvey Payne hi Harvey, good question, our Tow A Frame system stays on until the emergency break away pin is replaced or it would be pointless S emergency braking and legislation states it must have secondary breakaway braking system as i read it. We had a car tested using this method and it passed the mot brake test with one in the car, that's how effective it is. I will post some more media clips shortly, thanks mike

 

[Puddleduck]

Does everyone who has a tow bar on their vehicle check it is still okay after 11 years? I doubt many do as it's pretty much a 'fit and forget' addition.

When we had older cars with tow balls (still got an older car but no tow ball now as we have a wheelchair hoist) a visual check and pull push up down side to side manipulation of the tow ball and mount (no dirty minds please) was part of the weekly check along with fluids, lights etc. And also always before a longer journey even if the weekly check had been done a couple of days before.

Coming back from my parents a headlight bulb was working when we left but failed on the way home - has been replaced this morning as it wasn't safe to change it at the roadside. I was glad to be home

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[TheBig1]

Sorry but some towing accidents are down to the way people drive. This is an extreme example, but shows the physics involved

 

[charliesgrandad]

I don't think it's that clear cut, the installation was done incorrectly from the start by the look of it and would, at some point, fail. The car hadn't done a lot of mileage (assuming it recorded it when towed) so if it had been A-framed more extensively, as many do, it could have failed sooner. Yes there is rust etc but that doesn't negate the fact that the mountings should have been done properly in the first place, if they had been maybe there wouldn't have been anywhere for rust to start forming?

Does everyone who has a tow bar on their vehicle check it is still okay after 11 years? I doubt many do as it's pretty much a 'fit and forget' addition.

I had mine serviced by the installer during lockdown , I dont know how the vehicle from the original post records milage but mine does not whilst being towed

 

[TonyEmm]

TonyEmm

If you look at where the A frame broke away from the crossmember there is very little 'fresh' metal - most is rusted.

To blame the installer 10 years later is in my opinion not just unreasonable but idiotic.

The installation has clearly never been inspected or checked.

If anything this sort of posting will alert owners to get theirs checked.

As for statistics Insurance Companies will have data on all claims.

I’ll agree that rust is a factor. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s now clear that much of the rust was actually caused by the initial A-frame installation, with a lack of suitable reinforcing and poor rust preventative measures.
But, the vehicle in question despite it’s age, has less than 7000 miles on the clock. The vehicle is/was in such good condition that the assessors agreed to pay out twice the market value of a regular vehicle of that type and age, they clearly didn’t think it was an issue.

it’s also fair to say that annual inspections were not carried out. This, however, again lies at the door of the installer though who never suggested they were necessary and didn’t offer the service. While I’ve heard they do now (though it isn’t at all obvious on their website), they have never suggested, retrospectively, to the owner that they have it done.

Insurance companies will only have statistics of claims made. AFAIK, nobody actually pulls them altogether. The information is not readily available anywhere, .gov don’t possess it!

 

[TonyEmm]

The problem with A frames is that any Tom dick or Harry can make and fit one, with no testing by a competent person.
This shouldn't be allowed, so I suggest that Minxy Girl should take on that roll, all fun members A frames should be subject to her approval, failure means it's out with the gas axe.

I agree with You there! I liken my Grandmother to Horatio Nelson, she was 5’4”, had one arm and was blind in one eye, she’d never used a mig welder either but there was/is nothing to stop her picking mine up and having a go, no experience necessary!

Apologies to my GrandMaMa!

 

[TonyEmm]

You are correct but after 10 years? - but what proof is there that the installation wasn't done properly.

What is certain is that nobody has inspected it until now.

On what basis will an insurance company feel it should pay any claim?

It paid double the normal value, with no arguing whatsoever…

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[TonyEmm]

We will just use a towing dolly then Tony.

Funny you should mention Dollies, I used to build them!. And that’s another New can of worms!

 

[Two on Tour]

Funny you should mention Dollies, I used to build them!. And that’s another New can of worms!

Still got one sat in my back garden.

 

[olley]

Bloke used to turn up at the shows with one behind his RV.

 

[Barclaybasher]

It paid double the normal value, with no arguing whatsoever…

So why the complaint?

 

[TonyEmm]

So why the complaint?

It’s not about money….

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[olley]

It's always about money, yours or theirs.

 

[Pete D.]

Unfortunately, you’re not the guy to provide information, you have just demonstrated your lack of knowledge!

as Jim has chosen to ignore my request to lock the thread on the grounds of protecting the user’s and company’s confidentially, I shall fight my corner!

 

[pelican]

Thank you for that Minxy Girl !
at last, a voice of reason!

You mentioned towbars. My current Rapido came with a towbar already fitted. My first job was to remove, inspect, descale, repaint and refit with new bolts. (No easy task as it weighed 44kgs). I can post some shots here..

Blimey that looks like a pile of scrap.

 

[Pete D.]

Unfortunately, you’re not the guy

as Jim has chosen to ignore my request to lock the thread on the grounds of protecting the user’s and company’s confidentially, I shall fight my corner!

 

[Barclaybasher]

It’s not about money….

The complainant stated that DVSA has been informed and has been paid out by insurance company so why the threat of legal action if it's not about money?

DVSA would be enough surely......

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[TonyEmm]

It's always about money, yours or theirs.

This is about consumer’s rights, and what is morally right, it’s much more than money! Having said that, as they set lawyers on within 1 working day, there’s no doubt it’s going to cost them!!

 

[TonyEmm]

The complainant stated that DVSA has been informed and has been paid out by insurance company so why the threat of legal action if it's not about money?

DVSA would be enough surely......

You’ve misread the situation, the threat of legal action is from them! They are scared stiff their name will be released…

 

[TonyEmm]

Blimey that looks like a pile of scrap.

It’s fine now it’s been refurbished… 6mm thick steel takes a lot of rotting through, but you’re right, initially it looked horrendous! Not only that, when I got the rusty bolts out, I discovered that NONE of them had locking washers or locknuts fitted. Criminal installation really! But I don’t know who by….

 

[Barclaybasher]

You’ve misread the situation, the threat of legal action is from them! They are scared stiff their name will be released…

Reread her 2nd post - she threatened legal action

 

[pelican]

It’s fine now it’s been refurbished… 6mm thick steel takes a lot of rotting through, but you’re right, initially it looked horrendous! Not only that, when I got the rusty bolts out, I discovered that NONE of them had locking washers or locknuts fitted. Criminal installation really! But I don’t know who by….

No problem the rust was holding it together.
How was the rest of the chassis better I hope

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[TonyEmm]

No problem the rust was holding it together.
How was the rest of the chassis better I hope

The rest of the Chassis is Alko, no problem with rhat!

 

[TonyEmm]

I'm surprised these systems pass the type approval regs, a tow bar fitting certainly has to...

I thought I’d reply to this before.
NONE of these systems have passed any type approval regulations, there aren’t any for a-frames! The DfT don’t consider them worthy…

 

[TonyEmm]

Harvey Payne hi Harvey, good question, our Tow A Frame system stays on until the emergency break away pin is replaced or it would be pointless S emergency braking and legislation states it must have secondary breakaway braking system as i read it. We had a car tested using this method and it passed the mot brake test with one in the car, that's how effective it is. I will post some more media clips shortly, thanks mike

OMG, not Harvey Payne again? I hadn’t even realised he was on here and he’s blocked me already!

 

[TonyEmm]

Reread her 2nd post - she threatened legal action

I think you’ll find that was the owner’s knee jerk reaction when the MD of the company refused to discuss the situation. 3 mins of abuse was the only response! 4 unanswered phone calls, 2 unanswered emails and 1 response from a letter sent 1st class. That letter resulted in an immediate emailed response from their solicitor, not from the company itself! So far, only the other side has formally threatened legal action…

 

[Conniedriving]

I’ll agree that rust is a factor. With the benefit of hindsight, it’s now clear that much of the rust was actually caused by the initial A-frame installation, with a lack of suitable reinforcing and poor rust preventative measures.
But, the vehicle in question despite it’s age, has less than 7000 miles on the clock. The vehicle is/was in such good condition that the assessors agreed to pay out twice the market value of a regular vehicle of that type and age, they clearly didn’t think it was an issue.

it’s also fair to say that annual inspections were not carried out. This, however, again lies at the door of the installer though who never suggested they were necessary and didn’t offer the service. While I’ve heard they do now (though it isn’t at all obvious on their website), they have never suggested, retrospectively, to the owner that they have it done.

Insurance companies will only have statistics of claims made. AFAIK, nobody actually pulls them altogether. The information is not readily available anywhere, .gov don’t possess it!

OMG, not Harvey Payne again? I hadn’t even realised he was on here and he’s blocked me already!

No not blocked you on here as I do like to read your scaremongering threads

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}