EQUINE TRANSPORT INDUSTRY UNDER THREAT

A

abergavennymaria

New User
Joined
9 January 2013
Messages
5
Visit site
M registration Whittaker horsebox plated at 7.5 tonne with full living. On M 69 travelling north in August carrying two adults in front, two teenagers in the living and two 12 h ponies in the rear. Stopped by the police. Then asked to continue to services. Police are charging me that " I used a motor vehicle carrying a number of passengers, in a manner likely to cause danger, contrary to section 40 a of the R.T.A 1988 and Schedule 2 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988". They say I must have seat belts to carry passengers despite my lorry being old enough not to require seat belts. HUGE implications for all of us who carry ponies and grooms or riders to events and to those buying and selling second hand horseboxes!.

I have a clean licence and could have accepted a fixed penalty and points but was so incensed by the apparent injustice of this and concerned by the long term legal implications for the horse industry that I am contesting this case which I think is going to become extremely expensive, but it is very clear that this " very grey area" needs urgent clarification for the safety and sanity of us all. I am receiving legal advice and have had some help to date from transport industry specialists, all of which is obviously expensive !. My trial date has been set for February 11th 2013. All help advice Or
PHP:
financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.
 
Why can't you put seat belts in ? Its 30 years since they become complusory and 20 yrs since they became complusory for rear passengers.

I don't think this is putting the equine transport industry under threat exactly, it just seems sensible to wear a seat belt.
 
It is not new for all passengers to require seat belts. Traveling a few children loose in the living has long been frowned upon. Personally I run on 2 x seats, 2xseatbelts = 2x people. If one of those people is on the bunk they must have a seat available.
 
My M registered lorry used to have seatbelts, but for some reason they failed it's plating a couple of years ago (no other issues) and I was advised at the test centre (VOSA) to remove them to that it would go through, since the lorry is beyond the age where they are compulsory. I had them removed, the lorry passed and no problems since.

Whether you agree or disagree all the legislation seems to be most confusing and inconsistent, it's hard to know what to do for the best.
 
M registration lorries are not required to have seat belts fitted in the rear, therefore it is technically not illegal to not have seat belts, please refer to road traffic acts and VOSA guide to horsebox and trailer owners, page 22.
 
Whilst you may or maynot have been technically breaking the law it is unwise not to have seatbelts fitted. For the safety of the passengers you really ought to fit seat belts for people.
 
think your title is a little oTT but you are correct in that vehicles that did not have seat belts fitted originally do not require them to be legal. I had exactly the same query when transporting my kids in the rear of my old 1977 landy, those were side facing bench seats which you can't fit a 3 point belt to (unsafe, likely to garrotte passenger rather than reduce injury) lap belts were the only option and i never got around to fitting them (always too many other things to mend) :rolleyes:
Good luck with your case:)
 
I think the problem was the passengers in the back of the horsesbox, does your horsebox have a cut through cab?
 
Does your insurance know? Lots will add a premium or use it to get out of claims regardless of the laws so careful not taking a fixed penalty as if they decide to push it you may be done for this. I'd check with them before making any fuss.

Title is a bit melodromatic too :/
 
The law is quite clear ...

Seatbelts must be used where fitted
Front seats must have seat belts
Other seating may be used by passengers but only if deemed safe to do so

The last one is subject to an opinion and can only be defined in court
 
abergavennymaria said:
Or
PHP:
financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

I bet - Suddenly realized the implications of not taking the fixed penalty?!!I

How many is the vehicle licensed and insured to carry??

I work on 3x Cab seat = 2x passengers and driver and have actually refused to carry additional passengers in the rear as there were no belts fitted in the rear (but belts fitted in the front), plus the vehicle was only licensed for 3.
 
I think you will find that passengers in living is illegal. It's the same as if you have a motor home or tow a caravan, passengers in back are a no go! You should only have passengers in belted seats, or if lorry has no belts in front seats . Sorry but think you will lose this one!
 
natalia said:
I think you will find that passengers in living is illegal. It's the same as if you have a motor home or tow a caravan, passengers in back are a no go! You should only have passengers in belted seats, or if lorry has no belts in front seats . Sorry but think you will lose this one!
Click to expand...
Caravans/trailers are a legal no no for passengers

Perfectly legal to sit on bench seats without seatbelts in the back of a campervan
 
Well I have no idea whether it was legal or not

I do think it was very stupid and dont blame the police or whoever for trying to prosecute.

Just go on utube and watch some of the lorry crash videos where people are thrown out.

I would be ashamed of putting the teenagers at risk, not trying to get others to pay for your stupidity.
 
Just playing Devils advocate for a couple of moments;

As has already been stated, there is no requirement for seat belts to be fitted to any seats to the rear of the driver and front passenger seats in an HGV. Now, whether you deem it safe to carry people on the seats in the 'living area' of a horsebox when no belts are fitted is an entirely different matter. With relatively few horseboxes involved in injury (or non injury) incidents and especially where people are carried in rear facing seats I don't view the risks as being very great. Perhaps we should insist that all train passengers wear belts and we do away with people being allowed to stand on trains, buses and the London Underground?

The particular offence that the OP has been charged with is 'catch all,' in that the Prosecution only have to show their is a 'likelihood of danger,' not 'prove beyond reasonable doubt.' There is a likelihood that planet Earth will meet a big asteroid, but does that mean we have to worry about it on a daily basis? The same piece of legislation can be used for a number of other 'offences' beware those tying feed nets on the outside of their vehicles or trailers, fitting the 'wrong' tyres or even having a sat nav in the wrong position on the windscreen.

Fitting seat belts to the rear seats of a horsebox is not quite as eay as some would suggest. Most HGV floors are not designed to take the concentrated loads that a seat belt mounting is subject to. Manufacturers are (justifiably) scared of product liability legislation. Putting belts in would require all sorts of expensive design and testing, are we prepared to pay for this? Although I will accept that one manufacturer, at least is fitting belts in the rear of their boxes. It does seem a little perverse that a vehicle weighing 7.5 tonnes may only carry 3 people yet one weighing 2 tonnes more may trundle around a city centre all day carrying 20 times that number, often with half of them standing!

If the OP loses their case then a dangerous precident is set that means that all boxes, unless fitted with rear belts will be limited to carrying 3 people. Just think what impact that will have on folk travelling to shows, events and meetings. We complain that boxes and trailers are targeted for overloading, tacho and o-licence checks, potentially this another targetting area. Of course the other question is; if belts are fitted, how is anybody going to prove or disprove that they are being used?

I wish the OP luck in their forthcoming case.
 
I thought it was illegal, who knew.

If someone offered me a lift in the back of a lorry like that I would rather take my car, thankfully I have that choice.

Good point about buses etc. I kind of think you should have to wear them and always do on a coach if there is one.

I don't think this is a threat to anything except your bank balance and driving license OP and would have accepted the fixed penalty, maybe you still can with an admin/late fee if you ask.
 
MrsJingle said:
''All help advice Or FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE would be greatly appreciated. "

I bet it would! OMG Unbelievable!
Click to expand...


OMG I missed that bit until you pointed it out! Here we go again...

images



please sir, can I have some more:p:p:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
abergavennymaria said:
Thank you helen, Were your seat belts that you had removed fitted in the living or the cab of your lorry ?
Click to expand...

I had a similar issue with my horsebox (now sold) a few years ago.

I think that static seatbelts, ie those with no give, are illegal - which is probably what you had in your box, you need the sort of seatbelts that have some give, unless the brakes are on, not sure what they are called but they are standard now.

May be wrong, but pretty sure thats a conversation I had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top