20% of HGV operators now use multi-cameras

Published: 29 April 2015

20% of HGV operators now use multi-cameras
Last year the FTA prompted haulage companies to equip their HGVs with multi-camera systems. The call followed a 50% rise in ‘crash for cash’ type incidents within less than 12 months.
 
Since the FTAs recommendation what has the impact been? Are more HGV operators and owner drivers  investing in digital cameras? If they are how much are they spending and what are the benefits?
 
Freight Industry Times in association with Trackcompare.co.uk surveyed more than 300 companies.
The survey which was carried out earlier this month, found that 20% of HGV operators now equip their fleets with multi-cameras, with almost 83% of them being bought within the last 12 months.
 
Kjell Anderton, Director at TrackCompare.co.uk, said "As the vast majority of the various systems were bought within the last year, it seems the FTA's call for increased multi-camera use is being heeded.

At the very least it shows cameras are now at the front of people's minds - something backed up by the fact more than 29% of companies currently without multi-cameras are considering investing in them.

The most usual reason respondents give for acquiring cameras is to defend against unfair insurance claims, closely followed by improving driving standards in order to use less fuel and improve safety.  Not a big surprise, really."

Almost a third of respondents, 31%, said multi-camera systems were just too expensive to even consider.

{^youtubevideo|(width)425|(height)264|(border)False|(color1)#666666|(rel)True|(autoplay)False|(fs)True|(color2)#EFEFEF|(url)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK9-Ikcu0sY|(loop)False|(cookies)False|(hd)False^}
A video of a crash caught by an onboard camera which help clear the HGv driver of any fault.

Here are the full results of the survey.

Full results

1. Have you equipped your vehicles with multi-camera systems?
1.    Yes - 65 (21.31%);
2.    No - 240 (78.69%).

Questions 2 to 6 - put to respondents who answered "yes" to question one

2. When did you install your camera systems?
1.    0-12 months ago - 55 (84.62%);
2.    13-24 months ago - 6 (9.23%);
3.    more than 14 months ago - 4 (6.15%).

3. How much have you invested (per vehicle)?
1.    £200-£400 - 35 (53.85%);
2.    £401-£1,000 - 20 (30.77%);
3.    £1001-£1500 - 10 (15.38%).

4. Why did you make the investment?
1.    To monitor driver behaviour and encourage safer, more economical driving - 24 (36.92%);
2.    To be able to show what happens during any accident/incident and defend against unfair insurance claims - 26 (40.00%);
3.    To help drivers manoeuvre more easily and safely - 15 (23.08%).

5. Since installing your multi-camera systems, which main benefit have you experienced?
1.    Helped improve drivers' driving skills - 50 (76.93%);
2.    Reduced the number of accidents and incidents - 10 (15.38%);
3.    Driver and company protected against at least one unfair claim - 5 (7.69%).

Questions 6 and 7 - put to respondents who answered "no" to question one

6. If you haven't installed cameras, do you plan to do so over the next six months?
1.    Yes - 70 (29.17%);
2.    No - 170 (70.83%).

7. If you don't plan to install cameras, why not?
1.    No real benefit - 70 (29.17%);
2.    Never considered it before - 45 (18.75%);
3.    They are on my list for the future - 65 (27.08%);
4.    Too expensive - 60 (25.00%).
 
Kjell Anderton added "This was an important survey; the results showed clearly that fleet operators have begun to see the importance and many benefits that stem from installing multi-camera systems."

A total of 305 HGV operators took part in the UK-wide poll 3 - 15 April 2015.
Back to news
Just Added
  • From: Wigan To: Swanscombe
  • From: Scunthorpe To: Bristol
  • From: Stallingborough To: Denny
  • From: Scunthorpe To: Bristol
  • From: Hull (Kingston upon) To: Fakenham

Save money and reduce your carbon footprint with Returnloads.Net

With up to 3,000 new loads per day, saving over 250 million miles per year, the impact for the UK's Carbon footprint alone is huge.