No itr the passengers responsibility if an adult, or drivers if they are minors with regards seatbelts. Your car is only licenced as a 5 seater (2+3) and its your responsibilty to ensure it only carries five people at any given time not sure of the charge but if caught with more than the allowed amount of passengers you will be charged/fined and receive points.
They'll hit you with an overloaded vehicle charges instead, or something similar
If you have to ask this question then the answer is you shouldn't be on the road.
simply put there are 2 elements to the law on thisWhoever isn't wearing a …simply put there are 2 elements to the law on thisWhoever isn't wearing a belt, as long as they're an adult is responsible.The matter of too many passengers isnt specifically illegal (it doesn't need to be as the seat belt matter takes care of that) BUT and its a very big but, your insurance would be invalidated. Get prosecuted for that and it'll be a big fine and considerable pointsBut the big thing is how dangerous unrestrained passengers are. I've seen what happened to a back seat passenger when the car he was in hit a tree one cold winters evening. I wont be graphic but like it or not the human body has not evolved to suddenly hit solid things at 40 MPH. That's what the belts are for. To prevent injury and save lives.Why would you want passengers to be put at severe risk? Because no one ever planned to have a severe RTC but they keep on happening, don't they?
The law's probably been changed since this thread was posted (edited)
yes, not sure probably no, and yes since a standard car only takes 3 and u willing shove 4 in there lol then uh oh
Yes or possibly yes to all. Most standard cars you're only allowed 3 in the back.
Yup as driver of the car it is your responsibility to ensure all passengers are wearing a seatbelt. Therefore you cannot have 4 people in the back if there are only 3 belts
You'd be resposible as there are four peoplewhen there should only be three. If there were the right amount of people and not all were wearing seat belts, you would be responsilbe for those younger than 13 years of age (I think this is the correct age), whilst those older would be responsible for themselves, and could thus get points/fines themselves.
This reminds me of something I saw on tv the other week. A guy got pulled over for having one of his mates sitting in the kids seat with another two mates in the back and one more in front. Police were having a chat checking his details...no insurance etc turns out to be but the best bit was just before they were about to take him away he said I 've got to confess THERES SOMEONE IN THE BOOT!!!! The policeman when open the boot and could'nt help but laugh!!! Plonker!!
No worth the risk really!
I retract my previous post, seems as this is a gray area.
Telegraph
]Telegraph The department said it was ready to consider “making n … ]Telegraph The department said it was ready to consider “making non-compliance with seat belt wearing an endorsable offence”. One option available to ministers would be to follow the example of Northern Ireland, where drivers can get penalty points on their licence if they are not wearing a seat belt but passengers failing to do so are fined. In the rest of Britain, motorists and passengers over 14 can be fined £30 for not wearing a seat belt. A driver is also responsible for any passenger 13 or under.
What if there are not enough seat belts for all passengers in a vehicle? … What if there are not enough seat belts for all passengers in a vehicle? Currently, the law doesn't prevent you from carrying more adult passengers than there are seat belts. However, children up to 135cms tall must use child restraints with few exceptions, which means they must use the seats in the vehicle that have seat belts to secure their restraints. That can limit carrying capacity. However, the way in which passengers are carried must not cause danger to any person in the vehicle, for instance by overloading with unbelted passengers. Adult passengers without a seat belt can injure others in an accident. The police can prosecute if they judge that an unbelted passenger is a risk to the others in the vehicle. In a vehicle without rear seat belts (for example a classic car), childer aged three and over can only travel in the back. Those under three can't be carried at all because they must always use a child restraint.
You are responsible. You will be either given a 3 point endorsable fine or reported to the court for Overloading your vehicle (Section3 Road Traffic Act), comes under careless driving. So it is an offence comitted by the driver and it is pointlessly dangerous
The six young friends were heading home from a night out when the car they were crammed into crashed head-on with the lorry.
Their Ford Mondeo was crushed beyond recognition as the impact forced it under the truck.
The horrific smash – which even hardened police said “defied comprehension” – came on a sweeping, unlit bend of a notorious, rain-soaked road.
Last night experts were probing whether the car’s handling may have been affected by overloading.
Are you really bothered about a possible fine or points when at the end of the day you wil be risking the safety of your friends and family?
RedIron;2612314
Are you really bothered about a possible fine or points when at the end … Are you really bothered about a possible fine or points when at the end of the day you wil be risking the safety of your friends and family?
Yep, that'd be about right....
Your insurance would be invalid, you are only covered for the seating as advised by the car manufacturer, by your insurance company.
You are responsible for overloading your car, but only responsible to ensure anyone under the age of 14 is wearing a seatbelt. The responsibility of the passengers over the age of 14 is theirs and they will each receive fixed penalties.
I'd read this first though, and seriously consider whether its worth taking the risk thesun.co.uk/sol…ece
simply put there are 2 elements to the law on this
Whoever isn't wearing a belt, as long as they're an adult is responsible.
The matter of too many passengers isnt specifically illegal (it doesn't need to be as the seat belt matter takes care of that) BUT and its a very big but, your insurance would be invalidated. Get prosecuted for that and it'll be a big fine and considerable points
But the big thing is how dangerous unrestrained passengers are. I've seen what happened to a back seat passenger when the car he was in hit a tree one cold winters evening. I wont be graphic but like it or not the human body has not evolved to suddenly hit solid things at 40 MPH. That's what the belts are for. To prevent injury and save lives. Why would you want passengers to be put at severe risk? Because no one ever planned to have a severe RTC but they keep on happening, don't they?
16 Comments
sorted byThe law's probably been changed since this thread was posted (edited)
since a standard car only takes 3 and u willing shove 4 in there lol then uh oh
If there were the right amount of people and not all were wearing seat belts, you would be responsilbe for those younger than 13 years of age (I think this is the correct age), whilst those older would be responsible for themselves, and could thus get points/fines themselves.
No worth the risk really!
I retract my previous post, seems as this is a gray area.
Too many passengers: from ]DFT
So it is an offence comitted by the driver and it is pointlessly dangerous
The six young friends were heading home from a night out when the car they were crammed into crashed head-on with the lorry.
Their Ford Mondeo was crushed beyond recognition as the impact forced it under the truck.
The horrific smash – which even hardened police said “defied comprehension” – came on a sweeping, unlit bend of a notorious, rain-soaked road.
Last night experts were probing whether the car’s handling may have been affected by overloading.
Are you really bothered about a possible fine or points when at the end of the day you wil be risking the safety of your friends and family?
Yep, that'd be about right....
I'd read this first though, and seriously consider whether its worth taking the risk thesun.co.uk/sol…ece
Whoever isn't wearing a belt, as long as they're an adult is responsible.
The matter of too many passengers isnt specifically illegal (it doesn't need to be as the seat belt matter takes care of that) BUT and its a very big but, your insurance would be invalidated. Get prosecuted for that and it'll be a big fine and considerable points
But the big thing is how dangerous unrestrained passengers are. I've seen what happened to a back seat passenger when the car he was in hit a tree one cold winters evening. I wont be graphic but like it or not the human body has not evolved to suddenly hit solid things at 40 MPH. That's what the belts are for. To prevent injury and save lives.
Why would you want passengers to be put at severe risk? Because no one ever planned to have a severe RTC but they keep on happening, don't they?