Why do truck drivers need to keep a logbook?
Under the National Heavy Vehicle Regulator, logbook records for heavy vehicle drivers are required to help keep drivers and other motorists safe by ensuring adequate rest and reducing fatigue-related incidents on the road.
NHVR logbook requirements
The NHVR enforces strict logbook rules to ensure truck drivers comply with fatigue management laws. Heavy vehicle drivers operating vehicles over 12 tonnes Gross Vehicle Mass (GVM) must accurately record their work and rest hours in a logbook unless exempt.
Common NHVR logbook offences
Drivers and operators can face penalties for failing to comply with NHVR logbook regulations. The most common offences include:
- Failing to keep a work diary (logbook)
- Misleading work diary (logbook) entries
- Failing to record rest breaks
- Incomplete or incorrect records
What are the penalties for NHVR logbook offences?
1. Failing to keep a logbook:
Drivers must always carry their logbook unless operating under an exemption. Failure to have a logbook when required can result in a maximum penalty of $7,580..
2. Misleading work diary (logbook) entries:
A person must not record something in a work diary that the person knows, or ought reasonably to know, is false or misleading. Altering or providing false information in a logbook is a serious offence. The maximum penalty is $13,310.
3. Exceed work hour limits:
Standard work limits for solo drivers are 12 hours in 24 hours, and Basic Fatigue Management (BFM) work limits are 14 hours in 24 hours with accreditation. Breaching these limits can result in heavy fines. Minor offences attract a maximum penalty of $5,300 in the local court or $530 by infringement notice. Critical risk offences attract a maximum court-imposed penalty of $19,960.
4. Failing to record rest breaks:
Drivers must log rest periods accurately, including short breaks and mandatory long rests. Failure to take mandatory breaks can result in fines ranging from infringement notices of $530 to maximum court-imposed penalties of $19,960 for each offence (minor, substantial, severe, or critical)
5. Incorrect or incomplete logbook records:
Entries must be legible, complete, and accurate. Missing details like start/end times, odometer readings, or locations can result in a maximum penalty of $7,580.
NHVR Logbook Offences FAQs
If you're driving a fatigue-regulated heavy vehicle, you or the record keeper must keep your logbook (or a copy) for three years after it's made. That's the law unless there's a reasonable excuse.
Failure to do so attracts a maximum penalty in the local court of $8,250 in the local court (as of 1 July 2025). The same penalty applies if you forget to record the required information when you start work.
The 168 hour rule is part of the Standard Hours for solo drivers under the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL). Put simply: in any 7-day period (168 hours), you can't work more than 72 hours.
Why does this matter? If you work more than 75 hours in that week, it's considered a critical risk breach of fatigue laws. That's serious – you're looking at a maximum penalty of $20,590 (as of 1 July 2025) plus 4 demerit points.
Section 513 of the HVNL is one of the most important sections for severe logbook breaches. It empowers authorised officers to direct the driver of a heavy vehicle to stop the vehicle so that the authorised officer can enter and inspect it under section 520, or enter and search it under section 521.
Section 520 enables authorised officers to – amongst other things – inspect or film any part of your vehicle, its equipment, or load. They can check registration details, labels, and anything else that should be displayed on your vehicle. And importantly, they can inspect your logbook and other documents, and take copies or extracts.
Under the HVNL, you usually don't need a work diary (logbook) if you're operating within a 100-kilometre radius of your usual base.
However, once you operate outside of that 100km radius, you must carry a logbook and record your hours for the entire day – right from the start of your shift. A lot of people misunderstand this rule, and it can lead to some very expensive fines.
NSW logbook rules (work diaries) are governed by the Heavy Vehicle National Law (HVNL), which applies across most Australian states. This means the main rules around work hours, rest breaks, and record-keeping are the same across participating states – they're not unique to NSW.
The NHVR and NSW Police enforce these laws, but the legislation and penalties are standardised nationwide. Our legal team regularly handles these cases in NSW courts using the national legislation.
Both. Under Chain of Responsibility (CoR) laws, both drivers and businesses (employers/operators) can cop penalties for logbook or fatigue offences.
If the business knew – or should reasonably have known – that the driver was breaching fatigue laws or not recording their hours properly, the business (and its executives) can be held legally responsible. CoR penalties for businesses are often much higher than for individual drivers, especially in cases involving mass overloads where the accused is a corporation.
Logbook charges are often highly technical, which means there are defence and mitigation strategies available. Common approaches include:
- Administrative or clerical error: Showing the breach was a genuine, accidental mistake (like misunderstanding the rules) that didn't actually affect fatigue levels
- Reasonable steps defence: For businesses, proving you took all reasonable steps to make sure your drivers followed the law
- Procedural breach: Challenging whether the stop or the charge itself was valid due to an error by the regulatory officer
- Infringement notice (fine): This is a penalty notice issued roadside by police or the NHVR. It comes with a set dollar amount and, if you pay it, you don't have to go to court.
- Court Attendance Notice (CAN): This is a summons requiring you to appear in court. These are issued for the most serious logbook offences (like making false or misleading entries, or critical fatigue breaches). If you get one of these, you're facing maximum penalties – including demerits and substantial fines.
If you receive a Court Attendance Notice, you should seek legal advice immediately.
We are here to help
Our solicitors specialise in NHVR matters and represent clients in New South Wales and interstate courts. We have the experience and expertise to guide you through the court process from beginning to end and get you the best possible outcome.
Fourtree Lawyers NHVR experts can represent you and will help you minimise any fines or other penalties you may face.
Don't risk your future if you have a Court Attendance Notice for an NHVR matter. If you need advice from an NVHR offense lawyer, contact one of your traffic law specialists immediately at 1300 529 444 or fill out our contact form to arrange a free initial conference with a solicitor today. Contact us now! We offer 24-hour legal advice, 7 days a week.
More Reading,
For more details, visit the NHVR website.
Services
- Affray & Public Violence
- APVO | ADVO
- Assault Offences
- Bail Applications
- Break & Enter
- Centrelink Fraud
- Contravene | Breach AVO
- COVID-19 Penalty Notices
- Criminal Appeals
- Destroy Damage Property
- Drug Offences
- Firearms & Weapons
- Fraud Offences
- Larceny & Stealing
- Legal Aid NSW
- Murder & Manslaughter
- Offensive Behaviour
- Police Pursuit (Skye’s Law)
- Resist | Assault Police
- Section 10 Dismissal
- Section 14 Mental Health
- Sexual Assault
- Stalk | Intimidate
Testimonials
Very Helpful, Very Organized approach in defending you in court, Fourtree Lawyers are the company to chose if you want all the confusion and stress to be explained to you and for you in regard to facing court, these people are the Answer.
I’d like to thank Kevin and Jane for meeting me on the weekend and saving me a trip to the central coast (without a licence). I’d also like to thank Paul Popescu for doing a fantastic job representing me on a serious driving charge, he gave me clear instructions on what I needed to do and he was spot on, I received the best possible sentence. I would highly recommend Fourtree Lawyers, they travel all over NSW.
We found Fourtree Lawyers on Google after hours. I called on a Sunday and got some good advice. So went in to meet Kevin on the Monday. The outcome was a section 10(1)(b). We were so pleased and relieved. Thank so much to Kevin and Jane!! Would definitely recommend Fourtree Lawyers! Worth every cent! – JM Terrigal
I was recommend to Fourtree Lawyers from a friend whom also experienced a serious driving infringement. My situation was slightly more serious, being charged with drive while suspended, shared with a reasonably extensive driving record, meant my chances of driving home were minimal. Kevin’s realistic and knowledgeable approach not only prepared & educated me upon all possible verdicts, but also supported me with all possible optimistic outcomes. Kevin’s extensive knowledge of the legal system, combined with the understanding of the Judges expectations, and vast life experience resulted with an outstanding result,...
Court Results
Section 10(1)(a) - Not comply mass requirements - severe risk - Kurri Kurri Local Court.
Our client owns an interstate heavy haulage business based in Queensland. His business was charged with not comply with mass requirements - a severe risk that carries a base penalty of $10,790 plus an additional $540 for every % point over the limit. His vehicle was moving a dump truck from a quarry in Queensland to a quarry in NSW. Solicitor Kevin Vierboom made submissions that the method of calculating mass requirements was flawed and the 40% overload alleged was, in fact, less than 3% when everything was taken into consideration. After consideration of the technical case put forward along with submissions as to our client’s previous good character and repute, the Magistrate decided that the matter should be dismissed under Section 10(1)(a) with no conviction recorded against our client or his business. Our client agreed to professional costs of $254.
Section 10(1)(a) - Severity Appeal - Gosford District Court
Our client was a 32-year-old male. He has a heavy vehicle licence and drives semi-trailers for a living to support his young family.
He was charged with exceeding the speed limit for doing 100 in an 80 zone. Roadworks were under construction on the Pacific Highway with both 80km and 100km signs. in the local court, he was fined $300 and lost six demerit points. As a result, he lost his heavy vehicle licence and his job. Kevin Vierboom appealed the decision to the District Court based on severity and the appeal was upheld.
Our client is now able to resume his employment and provide for his family again. He was extremely relieved at the outcome.
Drive/permit heavy vehicle not comply mass requirement – severe | $750 fine | Goulburn & Gosford Local Court
Our client is a civil earthmoving and transport company, operating in the Sydney area.
While transporting an excavator from North Richmond to Wagga Wagga, our client was required to pull into a weigh station where they were found to be carrying a load 29% over the vehicle's limit. The matter was listed in the Goulburn Local Court, where a plea of guilty was entered and moved to Gosford Local Court for sentencing.
The offence carried a maximum penalty of $11,210 for an individual. However, as the defendant was a corporation, the operation of section 596 of the HVNL exposed our client to a possible penalty of $56,050.
Ms Denise McCarthy attended Gosford Local Court and made submissions, inter alia, that our client was not aware of the difference between the specifications of weight limits provided by Volvo and what weight limits the RMS requires for various types of vehicles.
Our client plead guilty at the earliest opportunity. The court saw fit to impose a penalty of $750 plus court costs.
Section 10(1)(b) – Class B m/v exceed speed > 30km/h – Lidar – Gosford District Court
Our client, a 29-year-old male who lives on the Central Coast, was charged with Class B m/v exceed speed > 30 km/h – Lidar. The maximum penalty for this offence is a 3-month licence disqualification period and a fine of $2,200.00. Our client is a bus driver by trade. Therefore, his livelihood depends on maintaining his licence. He is extremely valued by his supervisor and his work colleagues for being a hardworking and reliable employee. Initially, our client was convicted and charged with an $800.00 fine as well as a 3-month licence disqualification period. Solicitor Kevin Vierboom represented our client in an appeal to the District Court on the basis that the penalty was too severe. Solicitor Kevin Vierboom tendered subjective evidence to the Court and made extensive submissions concerning our client’s subjective circumstances, including his good character. The Magistrate accepted the evidence and ordered an 8-month Good Behaviour Bond under section 10(1)(b) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW). Our client was extremely relieved with this outcome. Our client can now continue working and maintain his livelihood.
Section 10(1)(a) - Solo driver work more than BFM maximum time - severe risk – Gosford Local Court
Our client is employed as a driver by a national distribution company. He is married with 2 small children. He had previously been retained as an advisor to the local council on heavy vehicle safety concerning several issues relating to heavy vehicle movements in the local government area. Our client was charged with a logbook offence concerning time recording and fatigue management. Solicitor Kevin Vierboom made submissions regarding the accurate completion of logbook entries, our client’s previously clean record, his outstanding references, and his contribution to safety in the community. After consideration of the case put forward along with submissions as to our client’s previous good character and repute, the Magistrate decided that the matter should be dismissed under Section 10(1)(a) with no conviction recorded against our client or his employer.
Matter Dismissed - Make a false or misleading entry in work record - Kurri Kurri Local Court.
Our client is an interstate truck driver based in Sydney. Our client was charged with making false or misleading entries in work record. This offence carries a maximum penalty of $10.000. Solicitor Kevin Vierboom entered a plea of not guilty on behalf of our client and set the matter down for a defended hearing. After considering the case put forward by our solicitor and the lack of evidence provided by the prosecution, the Magistrate dismissed the charges with no conviction recorded against our client or his employer.
No Conviction | $2,000 donation to the Children's Hospital - Failure to Comply with Improvement Notice – Latrobe Valley Magistrate's Court
Our client is a large road freight company based in Victoria. The business has been operating for over 50 years and has a reputable standing across Victoria and New South Wales. The company sought our help when charged with regulatory offences under the Victorian Heavy Vehicle National Law. The company’s director also faced charges under the same law.
The maximum penalties for this offence are $10,000 for an individual and $50,000 for a company.
Solicitor Kevin Vierboom attended the Latrobe Local Magistrate’s Court in Victoria to represent our client. Kevin’s submissions centred on the company’s unblemished record to date, the steps taken by the company to rectify the breach and the substantial contribution the business makes to the local community.
The Magistrate noted the improvements made by the company and accounted for the company’s good standing. As a result, the Magistrate ordered that no conviction be recorded and $2,000 be donated to the Children’s Hospital. The client was relieved and very happy with this result.
12 Month CRO – no conviction | Breach of Heavy Vehicle National Law (solo driver work more than standard maximum time: critical risk) | Gosford Local Court | 15/3/2019
Our client is a 47-year-old male who lives in the Newcastle area with his wife. He has been working as a heavy vehicle truck driver for around 9 months.
Our client was found in breach of the work/rest ratio prescribed by the Heavy Vehicle National Law. The maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of $16,510 and 4 demerit points.
Our client had not been confident that he understood the guidelines and had made several unsuccessful attempts to ascertain the right information regarding logbook entries.
Principal Solicitor Kevin Vierboom made submissions in mitigation of the possible penalty, focusing on our client’s positive traffic record – 2 offences in 16 years of driving – as well as our client’s responsible character, the Magistrate saw fit to impose a 12-month Conditional Release Order with no conviction.
Our client was ordered to pay $100 Professional Costs to the Roads & Maritime Service. Considering the maximum fine of $16.510, this was a great result.
Our client is a 64-year-old male who has six children.
Our client was stopped for a random check of his driver's license and national heavy vehicle diary by officers from the Traffic Task Force.
Our client is the main income earner in his household and the retention of his demerit points is paramount given that he drives trucks in the course of his employment. The imposition of a fine would also have been very burdensome for our client.
The maximum penalty for this offence is a fine of $16,510 and 3 demerit points.
Senior Solicitor Denise McCarthy attended Gosford Local Court and made strenuous submissions in mitigation of the penalty. Matters raised in her submissions included our client’s accreditation and sound driving record. Denise convinced the Magistrate to impose a Section 10(1)(a) dismissal with no conviction recorded.
The avoidance of a fine or loss of demerit points for our client was a huge relief.
Class B M/V Exceed Speed | Conditional Release Order without Conviction | Gosford Local Court
Our client is a 49-year-old male who is a truck driver by profession.
Our client was detected by a speed camera travelling 55km/h in a signposted 40km/h zone. As he is a truck driver, he must retain his license to carry out his work.
Our client attended our office and conveyed the stress that this pending Court matter had placed on him and the importance of him retaining his license.
The maximum penalty for this offence in the Local Court is a fine of $2,200 and a loss of six demerit points.
Senior solicitor Denise McCarthy attended Gosford Local Court and made strenuous submissions in mitigation of the penalty. Our client’s circumstances were put before the Court to reduce the penalty imposed. Our client was sentenced to a Conditional Release Order for 12 months without proceeding to conviction. No pecuniary penalty was imposed.
Our client was relieved that Denise was able to achieve such a favourable outcome for him. The problems he was facing in losing his license were all-consuming and the relief was immediate for him.
Section 10(1)(a) Dismissal | Solo driver work more than Standard maximum time - Critical risk | Goulburn Local Court
An employed heavy vehicle driver from Newcastle contacted us to get advice on a Court Attendance notice he had been issued in NSW. An application was made to move the matter to Gosford Court.
Our client had been charged with Solo Driver rest less than BFM minimum time - critical risk - Heavy Vehicle National Law (NSW) Section 254(1)(b). This offence carries a maximum penalty of a fine of $16,830.00 and the loss of 4 demerit points.
Our client is in the process of obtaining Australian citizenship and has paid out over $18,000 in application and filing fees. He was very concerned that a conviction could jeopardise his application for citizenship and see him lose his employment.
Our client has failed to observe the required 7 hours of unbroken rest over the 24 hours between 3.30am on 24 January 2019 and 3.30am on 25 January 2019. After reviewing the schedule of work and rest during the time in which the offence occurred, our client was working less than 38% of the time and well within the requirements for avoiding fatigue within that period.
Our solicitor set about explaining to the Magistrate all the circumstances leading up to the offence. After considering our submissions, the Magistrate found the offence proven. However, the charge was dismissed under section 10(1)(a).
Our client was very relieved at the outcome.
Drive/permit heavy vehicle not comply mass requirement – severe | conditional release order without conviction 12 months | Kempsey Local Court
Our client operates a freight business in Coffs Harbour.
Our client was charged with drive/permit heavy vehicle not comply mass requirement at a severe level after permitting a heavy vehicle to drive with a load of at least a tonne over the allowed capacity. The operator allowed this vehicle to drive on the road despite not meeting the requirements.
The maximum penalty this offence carries is six demerit points and a maximum court penalty of $3700.
Our client entered a guilty plea at court, which was accepted by the Magistrate. He was sentenced to a conditional release order without conviction for a period of 12 months.
Our client was very pleased with this outcome.
Make False or Misleading Entry in Heavy Vehicle Work Diary (x7) | Convicted under s10A – No Penalty on All Charges | Cessnock Local Court
Our client is a 56-year-old man from Sydney.
He was charged with seven counts of making false or misleading entries in a heavy vehicle work diary. Each offence carries a maximum fine of $13,730.00, totalling up to almost $100,000.00 in fines.
Our client instructed Fourtree Lawyers and was represented by Senior Associate Denise McCarthy at Cessnock Local Court.
Ms McCarthy made submissions in mitigation, supported by references and our client’s written letter of apology. Our client entered pleas of guilty at the earliest opportunity, and the Court accepted that he had taken steps to ensure immediate compliance, including switching to an electronic logbook system to prevent future record-keeping errors.
After hearing submissions, Magistrate Richardson convicted our client under section 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 for each of the seven sequences but imposed no penalty.
Our client was relieved and grateful with the outcome — the matter was finalised without fines, and the Court acknowledged his record-keeping improvements.
Client Reviews
From the first phone conversation Fourtrees gave us the confidence and reassurance that that our matter would be handled with professionalism and an outcome we were hoping for. The submissions given outlined how we felt and defended our matter perfectly. We couldn’t be happier with the care and comfort we received. We would recommend Fourtrees to anyone needing legal advice & will use Fourtrees for all and any of our future legal matters.
| IC | ★★★★★ |