Is it legal for a passenger to walk about while motorhome is in motion?

meanders said:
the driver has a beer, he should not be driving! That brings a whole new meaning to 'drink driving.'
Click to expand...
Non alcoholic beer obvs :doh:

But pedantically, as one [in England] is allowed a certain amount of alcohol in the bloodstream... :unsure:

Doesn't answer the Q about moving around whilst moving though.
A coolbox between the front seats could be the answer
:drinks:
 
Here is a difficult one:

Passenger has diagnosed dementia but will not accept it. Passenger is still deemed to have 'capacity'. Passenger refuses to wear a seat belt 4 out of 5 journeys as it 'traps them in the car' but occasionally, just gets in and puts it on automatically. Police say that the passenger is probably responsible, might be seen as 'vulnerable person' and therefore is the drivers responsibility. Alzheimer's UK advise that you cannot force them to wear a seat belt. Not going in the car is not an option given appointments etc. There is no bus service, and even if there were, the passenger would not be wearing a seatbelt.
 
Minxy said:
Because it's a legal requirement that if a seat belt is fitted it should be used, if not then the driver is a pillock for allowing it to happen
Click to expand...
Wearing a crash helmet and HANS Device makes you safer whilst driving, but I don’t wear them..

You don’t wear a seatbelt on a bus. You can travel at 70mph on a motorbike in shorts and trainers. Both these are legal.

I’m happy to chose my level of safe
 
Interesting one. This is what ChatGtp has to say

Skip to content
Open sidebar
ChatGPT



You said:​

Can you legally as a passenger walk around in a motorhome in the UK like you can on a coach while it's in motion

ChatGPT said:​

In the UK, passengers are legally required to remain seated with seatbelts fastened while a motorhome is in motion. This differs from coaches, where passengers may move around due to specific exemptions.goeuropean.co.uk

UK law mandates that all passengers in a motorhome must use seatbelts when the vehicle is moving. This requirement is outlined in the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 and the Road Traffic Act 1988. These laws stipulate that vehicles must not be used in a manner that poses danger to any person, which includes passengers moving around unrestrained .GOV.UK

While there are limited exceptions to seatbelt use in certain vehicles, such as buses and coaches, these do not apply to motorhomes. Therefore, passengers must remain seated with seatbelts fastened while the motorhome is in motion.goeuropean.co.uk+1motorhomeprotect.co.uk+1

It's important to note that even in older motorhomes where seatbelts may not be available for all seats, passengers should not occupy seats without seatbelts while the vehicle is moving. Doing so could be considered unsafe and may result in legal consequences .lifesurecouk.lifesure-insurance.co.uk

For safety and compliance with UK law, passengers should remain seated with seatbelts fastened while the motorhome is in motion. If a passenger needs to move, it's advisable to stop the vehicle in a safe location before doing so.goeuropean.co.uk

Favicon

Favicon

Favicon

Sources


















ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.
?

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Langtoftlad said:
But pedantically, as one [in England] is allowed a certain amount of alcohol in the bloodstream
Click to expand...
Non-pedantically, while that may be the legal position, I would prefer it if we adopted the airline pilot rules especially when driving a bigger vehicle. Still too many deaths on the road where alcohol or drugs are factor. No excuse.
 
How many bus conductors were killed or seriously injured at work , never saw it mentioned in media or by unions back when ? :)
 
meanders said:
airline pilot rules
Click to expand...
As ex airline crew... that is accepted as within 8ft of the aircraft...

Air France used to provide 1/4 bottle red on the pilots meal tray

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
Again from AI "In Britain, a significant portion of car crash fatalities, specifically 25%, involve occupants not wearing seatbelts. This means that over the last five years (2018-2022), more than 3,000 car occupants have died in crashes, and a quarter of them were unrestrained. Furthermore, 40% of back seat passengers killed in car crashes were also not wearing seatbelts".
 
meanders said:
Here is a difficult one:

Passenger has diagnosed dementia but will not accept it. Passenger is still deemed to have 'capacity'. Passenger refuses to wear a seat belt 4 out of 5 journeys as it 'traps them in the car' but occasionally, just gets in and puts it on automatically. Police say that the passenger is probably responsible, might be seen as 'vulnerable person' and therefore is the drivers responsibility. Alzheimer's UK advise that you cannot force them to wear a seat belt. Not going in the car is not an option given appointments etc. There is no bus service, and even if there were, the passenger would not be wearing a seatbelt.
Click to expand...
This is a problem I have met in my job. Not just passengers with dementia, but adults and children with learning disabilities or simply behavioural issues (when the driver could be the responsible person). As a LA, our recommendation was that there should be a responsible person supervising the passenger, to prevent the person unfastening the belt, or the belt could be fitted with a buckle guard to prevent the passenger unfastening the belt. About 2 years ago, DVSA issued a notice informing operators that buckle guards were not acceptable, on the grounds that they prevented the occupant from being able to release the belt in an accident. This was despite the additional measure of carrying a seatbelt cutter, which the emergency services also carry.
No exemptions were granted, other than the possibility that the person may (unlikely) have a medical exemption from wearing a seatbelt. Absolutely no consideration of the safety consequences of an unrestrained person being injured in a collision or even sudden stop.
Another example of DVSA being unaware of reality.
 
meanders said:
This means that over the last five years (2018-2022), more than 3,000 car occupants have died in crashes, and a quarter of them were unrestrained. Furthermore, 40% of back seat passengers killed in car crashes were also not wearing seatbelts".
Click to expand...
That proves that more folk die wearing seat belts, than not wearing them.
 
dunnah01 said:
Sends out the wrong message about motorhomers to an already angry public
Click to expand...
I think it could be aimed at anybody.
I often ride my 200 BHP motorcycle in t-shirt, shorts and flip flops
My choice

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
meanders said:
It conceivable could. The average adult at 70kg travelling at 70mph and coming to a dead stop has an effective weight of almost 70 imperial tons. Imagine that hitting you while walking across the road!, or even in the vehicle beyond the one that that you have just crashed into.

This site is quite interesting. https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/car-crash-force
Click to expand...
Motorhome manufacturers weren't legally obliged to fit seatbelts to rear seats in motorhomes until 2007, and the seats are still able to be used today so there must be a considerable number of members on here whos motorhomes fall into that category.
 
Scottish Scrutineer said:
As a LA, our recommendation was that there should be a responsible person supervising the passenger
Click to expand...
Doesn't work when the carer is also the driver? Fine for LA's who can pay for an extra body, but that's not really an option for a couple.
 
Yorick said:
That proves that more folk die wearing seat belts, than not wearing them.
Click to expand...
It does, because compliance at between 90 and 95% is actually very high. A seat belt is not guaranteed to save your life.

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 
meanders said:
Now everyone knows why we are referred to as Silly Suffolk. :(
Click to expand...

except, of course, the 'Silly' in traditionally spelt Seally and, in old English, it meant Godfearing or something religious because, at one time, Suffolk had more religious buildings than any other County in Britain.

So said the guide at Lavenham Church a few weeks ago?

I might be true because, there used to be a large Priory (5 acres) in Sudbury, Suffolk ( birth place of Gainsbough) run by the Black Friars ( Dominican Order) that was so important, representatives from ALL over Europe, attended a seminar there in the middle aged. (Not a journey lightly taken)

It was destroyed during the Reformation but there is still a Friars Meadow beside the river, Friars Way road and Priory walk.

Edit, changed earlier post.
 
Last edited:
Bill-H said:
Toilets on coaches can't be used legally while it's in motion then? Any pointers to the legislation please
Click to expand...
Well, yes they can.
The seatbelt legislation simply states that seated passengers must wear a seatbelt. ( in forward facing seats, where provided).

Therefore, if you get up to visit the loo, you are no longer ‘seated’ therefore are not required to wear a belt, a similar thing applies to standing in busses, where coincidentally you don’t need to wear a belt, even tho they are fitted!

As all coach toilets that I know of are rearward facing, that kinda negates the need to wear a belt whilst seated too…….and trust me you don’t want to pee whilst standing on a moving coach 🤣

So, moving that same rule to a MH, it follows that if you’re standing and making tea, or getting a cold one from the fridge, then you’re not seated, therefore don’t need to be wearing a belt🤦‍♂️

……you can’t make this shit up🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Ps…my avatar gives a clue to my job😎

Subscribers  do not see these advertisements

 

Join us or log in to post a reply.

To join in you must be a member of MotorhomeFun

Join MotorhomeFun

Join us, it quick and easy!

Join us

Log in

Already a member? Log in here.

Latest journal entries

Back
Top