Just out of interest, does anyone here know what the official word is in carrying a passenger in the bunk?
During training it seems to be alright, and I’ve seen quite a few news reports (mainly when it was kicking off in Calais last year) where reporter would be sat in passenger seat and camera man on the bunk.
Is it one of those things where everyone will have a different answer? Also, if say you got stopped by DVSA/VOSA with 2 passengers, would they/can they do anything or is it solely a police matter?
Something in another thread just made me think about it, but I’m sure it won’t be a black and white answer!
I would think no seat belt means a ticket? My mates brother had his wife asleep in the bunk, for some reason he didn’t notice the traffic stopped and ran into the back of the truck in front sending his wife through the windscreen and into the space between the two trucks where the truck behind ran into the back of him and pushed him back into the front truck squashing his wife between the two trucks killing her instantly. A very sad lesson to learn.
If double manning and the resting driver insists on using the bunk am I correct in assuming that the active driver is legally liable and the resting driver (in the bunk) can expect no action ?
Ffs what sort of action would you expect to have whilst your mate is driving just the other side of the curtain. Behave yourself. Anyway a speed bump or pothole could ruin everything.
The legal stance appears to be that although no seatbelt is required because it is not a forward facing seat most Traffic Police would deem the vehicle to be in a dangerous condition with a 12stone body loose and able to fly around the dab. Therefore it may be deemed as dangerous driving.
That is how my local traffic police department view it
shep532:
The legal stance appears to be that although no seatbelt is required because it is not a forward facing seat most Traffic Police would deem the vehicle to be in a dangerous condition with a 12stone body loose and able to fly around the dab. Therefore it may be deemed as dangerous driving.
That is how my local traffic police department view it
How the hell does a second driver on the bunk make the driver liable to get done for dangerous driving? Please don’t tell me you spout that on cpc courses
If you’re on the bunk, and the driver does an emergency stop - what’s going to happen? I can imagine a horizontal person on that bunk breaking their back in a big enough impact…
Surely the law says either “It’s illegal for all” or “it’s allowable for all”.
Having a person there “with permission” does not circumvent the law if it’s illegal for all.
Having someone there without permission doesn’t break the law of the land - if it’s NOT illegal for there to be someone there…
Perhaps some clarification in the law is required? - I would have thought that any passenger being conveyed MUST be sitting in the passenger seat with the belt on.
This would be a bit awkward for “Double Manners” trying to get some shuteye though eh?
Still researching the answer to Dave’s question, so bare with me on that one!
As for driving with a passenger in the sleeper cabin, it looks like this is essentially covered by the “The Motor Vehicles (Wearing of Seat Belts) Regulations 1993” legal stuff although nothing specific in there about this scenario. However, there might be a way:
Section 5: Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every person—
(c) riding in a rear seat of a motor car or a passenger car which is not a motor car;
Section 6 part 3: (3) The requirements of regulation 5 do not apply to—
(c) a person riding in the rear of a vehicle if no adult belt is available for him in the rear of the vehicle."
No seatbelts are fitted in the rear of the truck, therefore section 6 part 3 paragraph c provides what appears to be a get out clause. Just if you get done for this, don’t complain to me.
shep532:
The legal stance appears to be that although no seatbelt is required because it is not a forward facing seat most Traffic Police would deem the vehicle to be in a dangerous condition with a 12stone body loose and able to fly around the dab. Therefore it may be deemed as dangerous driving.
That is how my local traffic police department view it
How the hell does a second driver on the bunk make the driver liable to get done for dangerous driving? Please don’t tell me you spout that on cpc courses
I only use information from reputable sources. I reckon a Traffic Police Inspector is a reputable source. He did say it really depended on circumstances but because there isn’t a specific offence then dangerous driving could cover it.
I made a specific enquiry with the local traffic Police the last time this was raised on Trucknet. The answer was vague, there were 12 Police officers in the room when I asked including 2 Sergeants and an Inspector. I got about 6 different answers initially, but after much consulting they all agreed it could range from nothing to a seatbelt penalty to Dangerous Driving.
The offence of dangerous driving covers a multitude of things and is a widely used offence when no other more specific offence has been committed. It wasn’t that long ago I saw a Police Camera Action type program, kid on mums knee in the back - driver warned for dangerous driving. Of course it may not have got through the courts.
Why would the driver get done it’s the passengers responsibility to wear a seat belt. Don’t most units with double bunks have some sort of restraint between the seats on the lower bunk. The last one I had had a metal frame and the one before had netting.
knight2:
Why would the driver get done it’s the passengers responsibility to wear a seat belt. Don’t most units with double bunks have some sort of restraint between the seats on the lower bunk. The last one I had had a metal frame and the one before had netting.
I would suggest the guy in the bunk hasn’t actually committed an offence - the seatbelt laws don’t apply. So there’s only the driver they can ‘do’ … Maybe
knight2:
Why would the driver get done it’s the passengers responsibility to wear a seat belt. Don’t most units with double bunks have some sort of restraint between the seats on the lower bunk. The last one I had had a metal frame and the one before had netting.
I would suggest the guy in the bunk hasn’t actually committed an offence - the seatbelt laws don’t apply. So there’s only the driver they can ‘do’ … Maybe
The driver is only responsible for anyone under the age of 14, so that’s out.
