weeto:
shep532:
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.
But my theory isn’t that the driver is responsible for that person. If we were looking at ‘dangerous driving’ then the driver is responsible for the vehicle and its safety. By charging the driver, he learns he is responsible for what happens and won’t let it happen again.
Yes if there was a child the driver could be fined - that is laid down in the regulations. If it isn’t a child then he can’t be fined, but neither can the guy in the bunk so does that mean it just gets declared ok?
I heard Essex Police were quite strong on this - surely someone on here has experience? I’m just guessing based on information I have
the maoster:
Of course the law can be err “flexible” on this matter when it comes to a cameraman on the bank of an unmarked police lorry can’t it?
Police vehicles are exempt from the seat belt law.
I think it might be one of them cases where there isn’t actually a specific law against it, probably because the law makers didn’t even think about the possibility of it happening.
Looking at the link on seat belt law, it says you must wear a seat if fitted to the seat you are using. Well it’s not a seat and it hasn’t got a seat belt anyway.
So, the not doing the driver is out because the passenger is over 14 is irrelevant if you’re not doing them on the seat belt law.
.
The only other law I could think of which might cover it would be whatever law they use when they haul people out of car boot or backs of vans,
I suppose that’s a construction and use offence, using a vehicle to carry more passengers than it was designed for, or something similar, but if it’s your co-driver on the bunk then you’ve haven’t got more people in the vehicle than its built to carry, just the passenger isn’t in a seat.
So then you get Sheps, Dangerous Driving, or possibly due care and attention, or some other offence the Police use when they can’t find a specific offence.
Maybe it’s one of those things where an over zealous copper charges you with it and it gets quietly stopped by the CPS, as might be to risky to bring the case to court, and no real public interest in a prosecution.
The-Snowman:
shep532:
with a 12stone body loose and able to fly around the dab.
12 stone? Yeah right. And the rest! You seen the size of some of them? 
+1
Nobody mentioned children…
I spent all my not at school time in the lorry with my Dad, a lot of that time was spent on the bunk, times were different then of course and lorries never had seat belts either, but I did manage to make it to adulthood without getting killed.
Why is everyone so worried about the law? It’s like the old communist regimes where everybody is scared they’ll be dragged off to a gulag for doing something that is forbidden.
Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk