| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Keith Wallace
United Kingdom
367 Posts |
 Posted - 10/10/2009 : 19:56:31
|
I would have thought this subject would have come up before, but a search for "seat belts" did not produced any results.
My nephew's daughter is 6 years old and has asked to be taken for a short ride in my PB. What is the law concerning children riding in our cars not fitted with seat belts?
Keith |
|
|
Peter Green
United Kingdom
1682 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 20:40:52
|
Keith,
Look at the 'Laws for juniors' topic on this forum.
Peter. |
 |
|
|
Peter Green
United Kingdom
1682 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 22:55:05
|
Keith,
I should have mentioned that the 'Laws for juniors' topic has been archived so you must tick the 'Archived Posts' box if you are going to look for it through the search facility.
Peter. |
|
|
|
Pat B
United Kingdom
66 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2009 : 22:10:57
|
Keith,
Having gone through the archived notes, I don't beleive it was ever answered satisfactorily.
There was a lot of comments re the fact Tiple-M cars don't have seat belts and the implication that as the regs seem to be unclear about cars without belts that it might be OK to take kids.
My interpretation of the law in respect of a Triple-M car (as a layman but also as a Father of a 6 year old and a 2 year old) is based on the law as it applies to modern cars ie: the law requires children of a certain age / height to be carried in an approved child seat which has to be properly restrained in the car (typically either by ISOFIX points or seat belts).
Therefore, if you are to carry children in a car not originally fitted with seat belts, the same rules apply ie: they should still be in their 'approved' seat which should be properly restrained in the car, irrespective of the original spec of the car.
However, as I no longer have a roadworthy Triple-M car, I don't currently have this problem !
I would like to reiterate that this is my view and my interpretation of the law.
Pat. |
|
|
|
RacingSnake
United Kingdom
62 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 20:48:59
|
I am afraid I cannot recall the conclusions in detail, but it has been covered on the VSCC forum, though I am no longer a member, so cannot get at the information.
For what it's worth, I do remember that sitting in the rear of a closed saloon (with no belts) seemed to be the easiest way to get children started young, but things got tricky once in open-top vehicles. Some used ratchet straps to hold an approved seat to the chassis rails, which may be sound from an engineering point of view but probably frowned upon by the law.
Maybe find a private road or friend with a long drive....Earl of March has one I think... |
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 12/10/2009 : 21:08:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by RacingSnake
............ it has been covered on the VSCC forum, though I am no longer a member...
Shame on you. The VSCC is a great club. Almost as good as the MMM.
I concluded that I could not give my grandchildren a ride until they are 135cm tall or 12 years old. Fitting a child seat not being a practical proposition. And do you want them belted in with no roll bar?
Peter |
Edited by - Peter Scott on 12/10/2009 21:13:36 |
|
|
|
Rodney Collins
United Kingdom
424 Posts |
Posted - 13/10/2009 : 16:50:57
|
I seem to remember from when this sunject was brought up before and it was pointed out by the techies amoung MMM members that there is nowhere on a T-M car where a seat belt could be fixed that would be secure enought satisfy either an automotive engineer or a copper! As cars in the 1930 did not require such fitting.
Rodney |
|
|
|
Terry Andrews
United Kingdom
546 Posts |
Posted - 13/10/2009 : 19:22:07
|
Hi Everyone,
Not certain about previous threads but having cars during the 1960Æs when seat belts were starting to be fitted before the legislation this has always been my understanding:
Although some cars had fittings I do not think they were standard until around 1965. The compulsory wearing of front seat belts came in some years later. But the compulsory wearing of seat belts is not retrospective for cars before 1965 (I think). This is irrespective of the age of the wearer. This is something within the construction and use legislation. The rear seat belts came in a lot later but it is my understanding that the same principle applies. I think the issue is when the law applies and this is dependant on the construction and use regulations hence the confusion. This however, is a separate subject to safety. Basically, we all make our own risk assessment every time we drive an old car compared to a modern one. I have worn a seat belt since 1964 in a ômodernö car but I have chosen not to wear one in a P type etc. My children travelled in the P type when they were small and enjoyed the experience. We even went to the Police show in Essex and on one ever commented on the fact that smalls were in the front seat. However, driving a P type now is far more dangerous than 25 years ago. The decision is yours...... Terry
|
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 13/10/2009 : 20:49:57
|
Terry
The law changed recently ( a year ago?). Up until then the rules were as you describe but after the relevant date young children cannot travel in a two seater without an approved child seat unless they are 12 years old or more than 135cm tall.
The terminology is mine not that of the regulations. In practice, it means that up to a year ago I could give my grandchildren a ride in my PA but can no longer do so unless they are 12 or 135cm tall.
As RacingSnake stated the VSCC did publish a comprehensive explanation when the changes came into effect.
Peter
|
|
|
|
RacingSnake
United Kingdom
62 Posts |
Posted - 13/10/2009 : 23:10:09
|
I think this covers the matter:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/think/focusareas/children/childincar?page=FAQ&whoareyou_id=
Under 3yrs in a vehicle with no seatbelts => never allowed.
Over 3yrs in a vehicle with no rear setbelts => child may travel unrestrained in the rear seats.
12yrs/135cm bit applies to seats that have seatbelts, be they front or rear.
On the aside re. VSCC membership- Yes great club, but no end of direct-debit problems meant I needed to pay manually, and I never quite got round to it, what with children/work/moving.... Since replicating ourselves it has also been impossible to attend VSCC events because of vehicle vs. no.-of-humans and qty.-of-clobber issues...
The smiley in the quote from my post has hung on from another comment, and does not refer to me not being in VSCC of course.
|
|
|
|
Peter Scott
United Kingdom
1240 Posts |
Posted - 14/10/2009 : 10:08:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by RacingSnake
...............12yrs/135cm bit applies to seats that have seatbelts, be they front or rear.
Alex
Children over 12 yrs or 135cm may be carried in the front seat of a car even if it has no seat belts. The rule, as shown in your link, states that "Seat belt must be worn IF available." (my upper-case)
Peter
PS VSCC I appreciate that you cannot do everything you would like to do especially when you have young children. I didn't join the VSCC until I was close to retirement. |
|
|
|
Keith Wallace
United Kingdom
367 Posts |
Posted - 14/10/2009 : 13:32:00
|
Item 13: Refers specifically to classic cars without seat belts and states only that children under three years must be carried in the rear seats.
(I only wanted to drive her slowly for about 800 yds)
Opps! sorry I have miss read it, please ignore.
Keith |
Edited by - Keith Wallace on 14/10/2009 13:49:26 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
