Arval warns van fleet compliance is moving closer to HGV standards

Van operators are facing increasing regulatory obligations as new legislation brings light commercial vehicle (LCV) compliance closer to the standards traditionally associated with heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), according to Arval.

The fleet leasing and mobility specialist says a series of legislative changes is creating additional responsibilities for van fleets, including new MOT requirements, changes to drivers’ hours regulations and enhanced tachograph obligations.

“For many, the issue is not simply compliance with individual rule changes. Rather it is whether their existing fleet governance, policies and procedures have kept pace with how regulators and enforcement authorities are increasingly viewing van operations,” he said.

Among the vehicles affected are 4.25-tonne electric vans, which are increasingly being adopted by fleets as replacements for conventional 3.5-tonne diesel models. Although recent UK regulatory changes mean these vehicles are no longer subject to tachograph requirements or first-year MOT testing, they must comply with new DVSA heavy vehicle testing rules introduced earlier this year.

The updated requirements apply to all vehicles over 3.5 tonnes and include Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) visual inspection checks, digital PG10 prohibition clearance notices and revised plating certificate processes. Passenger service vehicles over this weight must also comply with new door safety testing requirements.

In addition, newly registered goods vehicles over 2.5 tonnes used internationally for hire and reward are now required to be fitted with smart tachographs under the final phase of the EU Mobility Package, which came into effect this month.

Parker said the increased regulatory focus reflects the road safety risks associated with commercial vehicles, citing International Road Union data showing they are involved in almost one in five road traffic incidents and one in three road fatalities.

“We’re seeing a broader trend towards increased data capture, standardisation and evidential scrutiny across all commercial vehicle operations. Because of this, the distinction between ‘van fleet’ and a truck-style ‘regulated transport operation’ is becoming increasingly blurred,” he said.

Arval believes the biggest challenge for many organisations lies not in understanding the regulations themselves, but in ensuring internal governance has evolved to meet changing expectations.

Unlike HGV fleets, which typically operate within structured compliance frameworks covering transport management, vehicle maintenance, fatigue management and driver training, van fleets often lack the same level of documented oversight.

Parker warned that while many businesses have policies covering areas such as fatigue, mobile phone use and vehicle checks, they may struggle to demonstrate how those policies are enforced, how drivers are trained and whether managers intervene when issues arise.

“Those issues become critical once police, enforcement authorities or the Health and Safety Executive begin investigations into not just the collision itself, but the wider corporate systems surrounding it. There is a risk that internal governance has not evolved at the same pace as the new regulatory expectations. In the most serious cases, directors and senior managers could face personal scrutiny and can be found legally liable,” he said.

He added that fleet operators should review whether incident procedures are properly tested, management responsibilities are clearly defined and compliance systems are robust enough to withstand external scrutiny.

“The regulatory direction of travel is becoming clear. Although van fleets are unlikely to face the same oversight as HGV operators in the immediate future, the gap between the two is narrowing. At Arval, we are finding ourselves involved in more and more conversations about this shift and are advising many fleets on how to adapt to an evolving situation.”