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

[TDub49]

Baaaaa!

Doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done either……

It just means if “you” don’t think it should be done don’t do it!

It doesn’t mean if “you” don’t think it should be done, lecture and bore other people


Baaaaa!

Backatcha . . .

 

[Scottish Scrutineer]

Oh, and when I say Cruise control. This was a precisely cut-for-purpose broom handle with a walking stick ferrule at each end. It would wedge hard down between the accelerator, and a bit of door furniture.

When I was a young teen, my weekend and holiday job was in the workshop of a haulage firm. Most common vehicles in the fleet were Atkinson Borderers, powered by Gardner 180 (6LXB) engines. Almost all of them had a wooden wedge loose on the floor by the door; its function was to hold the accelerator pedal fully open. Top speed on the flat was 57mph (with a favourable wind).

 

[Scottish Scrutineer]

People walk about on trains all the time.

Trains tend not to have to swerve, stop suddenly, suffer blow-outs, nor collide with stationary or slow moving objects that frequently. However when they do leave the rails, injuries to passengers are often quite serious.

 

[KiltedCamper]

I was Operating Coaches in the 90's and was involved with taking school children on 'trips' both here and abroad and, as far as my company was concerned, the 3 to a dual seat, had been stopped a decade before?

You stated that MANY children were killed.

Who were these MANY because, the main loss of life, was caused by school owned mini-buses driven by teachers, as far as I can recollect, can you be more specific?

Seatbelts were never, by law, fitted to Council sponsored School BUSES, only on Private Hire COACHES!

I spent nearly £4000 having seatbelts fitted to one of my School Buses to forefill the terms of the contract, and none of them were used by the children!

Why, because, I was told by my Company Solicitor, that IF my driver told the children to use the seatbelts, my Company was liable for any injuries, but IF the School told the children, THEY were responsible.

NEITHER said anything, we just displayed the seatbelt stickers required by law because, how can a driver of a Double Decker, who cannot see 50% + of his passengers, and a Head Teacher who is NEVER there, ensure that the children, buckle up?

I was Operating Coaches in the 90's and was involved with taking school children on 'trips' both here and abroad and, as far as my company was concerned, the 3 to a dual seat, had been stopped a decade before?

You stated that MANY children were killed.

Who were these MANY because, the main loss of life, was caused by school owned mini-buses driven by teachers, as far as I can recollect, can you be more specific?

Seatbelts were never, by law, fitted to Council sponsored School BUSES, only on Private Hire COACHES!

I spent nearly £4000 having seatbelts fitted to one of my School Buses to forefill the terms of the contract, and none of them were used by the children!

Why, because, I was told by my Company Solicitor, that IF my driver told the children to use the seatbelts, my Company was liable for any injuries, but IF the School told the children, THEY were responsible.

NEITHER said anything, we just displayed the seatbelt stickers required by law because, how can a driver of a Double Decker, who cannot see 50% + of his passengers, and a Head Teacher who is NEVER there, ensure that the children, buckle up?

Regarding dates: My daughter was born in 1986 and started school in 1990.

We had fights with the school over lack of seatbelts. They refused to use a coach company that had seat belts because of the cost. I offered to pay the extra cost but they still refused. As a result, whenever there was a need to use coaches, a few of us parents would take our children to and from the destination in our own cars, following the coach. In parallel with that we lobbied our local MP's, appeared on local radio and elicited help from Glenda Jackson. We also lobbied the coach industry. If people don't use seatbelts where they are available they are putting other people at risk.

Moving around in a motorhome whilst it is in motion is a danger to everyone in the vehicle and as stated by others, it's illegal. Why anyone would choose to do it baffles me

 

[L' Hobo]

People walk about on trains all the time.

But the trains rarely have to do emergency braking because some idiot has swung across in front it!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Yorick]

If you've been in the pub all afternoon, it's pretty obvious you'll need a pee at some point.

 

[L' Hobo]

Regarding dates: My daughter was born in 1986 and started school in 1990.

We had fights with the school over lack of seatbelts. They refused to use a coach company that had seat belts because of the cost. I offered to pay the extra cost but they still refused. As a result, whenever there was a need to use coaches, a few of us parents would take our children to and from the destination in our own cars, following the coach. In parallel with that we lobbied our local MP's, appeared on local radio and elicited help from Glenda Jackson. We also lobbied the coach industry. If people don't use seatbelts where they are available they are putting other people at risk.

Moving around in a motorhome whilst it is in motion is a danger to everyone in the vehicle and as stated by others, it's illegal. Why anyone would choose to do it baffles me

Good for you and I agree with most of what you write, but you still haven't answered the question about your statement that 'MANY children were killed in Coach crashes in the 90's'?
A small number, may have been, but not MANY!

 

[B+W vanman]

If you've been in the pub all afternoon, it's pretty obvious you'll need a pee at some point.

Been riding without a helmet, much? In the past like?

 

[eddie]

Moving around in a motorhome whilst it is in motion is a danger to everyone in the vehicle

Why?

Personally my RV has a slide out and when travelling there is a physical wall behind the driver

and as stated by others, it's illegal.

How is it illegal? What law? no one yet has been able to quote the "law" Its all supposition from people that "see" and fear danger

Why anyone would choose to do it baffles me

Need a wee? fancy a drink? feeling hungry, on cruise at 60 on a long straight motorway, nod to wife, "need a wee" and trot back for a wee

Why anyone would be too terrified to do it baffles me

And frankly, if any motorhome hit something at 60 mph it would disintegrate around you anyway

 

[Dogstoat]

My 1990 Foster & Day 2.3d has belts for the driver and front seat passenger.
It has seating for 5 other people but no belts are fitted.
It would be legal for me to carry passengers in this manner .
I have no plans to do so but if I needed to then I could.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[our poppy llll]

Hot swapping in a RV is simple.

Press the electric seat control and slowly slide the Captains seat backwards
Tilt the steering wheel to the "upright" seat from the more convenient "in lap" position.
Remove one hand from the steering wheel
Allow wife to "stand in front of you in the gap between your knees and the steering wheel
Remove other hand.

Tell wife she can now sit down in the Captains chair

This is not ordinary porn, this is Edward’s porn..
Whoo hoo did the earth move baby! Yeah!

 

[L' Hobo]

Why?

Personally my RV has a slide out and when travelling there is a physical wall behind the driver

How is it illegal? What law? no one yet has been able to quote the "law" Its all supposition from people that "see" and fear danger

Need a wee? fancy a drink? feeling hungry, on cruise at 60 on a long straight motorway, nod to wife, "need a wee" and trot back for a wee

Why anyone would be too terrified to do it baffles me

And frankly, if any motorhome hit something at 60 mph it would disintegrate around you anyway

I hope your never in Sweden and hit a Moose!

They don't disintegrate very easily.

 

[Rog NotJane]

It’s also not really you that anyone cares about in the crash. It’s the people you crash into.

But in other countries some things are done differently. For example, how did all those US states get to a point of not requiring motorcycle helmets? They looked at the same facts - mortality risk and individual choice - and just weighed the two sides of the argument differently.

Because no state healthcare? If you crash a bike in the US, the government will maybe brush you to the side of the road if you can’t crawl there yourself.

And our direction of travel is almost never towards greater individual freedom and fewer laws and regulations. It is always towards more restrictions, more intrusive authority. We add reams of it - many, many pages - every year.

This I can completely agree with. It’s somewhat a function of beuracracy though. It’s also not (in itself but also generally) a good argument to ignore laws. Nor is it a good defence in court.

 

[dunnah01]

This thread proves the point that you can't win an argument with an idiot because their experience will always win

 

[Jim]

This thread also proves that some people probably never see the funny side of anything.

It also proves that even in the age of the combustion engine, high horses are still popular

It also proves that in an era where religion is dying, there are still those who love to preach at others.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[eddie]

Me trying to keep a straight face when being lectured (and in my mind I can only hear that nasally whiny voice) about how naughty I've been for spending a penny or grabbing a couple of Cokes

 

[The Tafia]

Just posing an answer to a question on a different thread, but is it legal for any passenger to get up and move about in the back of a motorhome whilst it is underway?
Coaches have toilet compartments for passengers to use while the coach is in motion, and they used to have (maybe still do) hostesses who bought drinks round while the coach was in motion.

Now let me think! No.

 

[eddie]

Now let me think! No.

Yes it is as has been established earlier in this thread of law versus paranoid safety worriers

 

[meanders]

I am not sure if this .gov document helps at all. I still hold the view that if a police officer wanted to take action they would. It might or might not get thrown out by CPS or the court, but it's not a risk I wish to test!

 

[Yorick]

Next time you're on a motorway, I dare you to undo your seatbelt for 20 seconds.
I doubt you'll die, and only same as nipping into the back.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jim]

I still hold the view that if a police officer wanted to take action they would.

I imagine most everyone has that view. So like any law breaking, its best to do it when you know they are not looking.

 

[Cookieboy68]

Don't get me started on bikers being hard wired to think they can choose which laws to obey.

He isn't breaking any laws,he says he wears flip-flops and shorts and that it is his choice

 

[our poppy llll]

This thread also proves that some people probably never see the funny side of anything.

It also proves that even in the age of the combustion engine, high horses are still popular

It also proves that in an era where religion is dying, there are still those who love to preach at others.

What is great about this thread is that you can skip the serious posts, and laugh out loud over the funny posts. The funny posts are really the best. My wife even commented on my post and said “I don’t know why you think it unusual me crawling to the fridge to get you a beer, I’m pretty used to it after doing it for years to get my Gin!” Classic..

 

[dunnah01]

He isn't breaking any laws,he says he wears flip-flops and shorts and that it is his choice

It was a generalisation. You very rarely see a biker not breaking some law or other..

 

[our poppy llll]

I have nipped to loo on several occasions….hubby is under strict instructions to shout ‘roundabout’ if necessary. In France this can be very frequent

Why do you go to the loo frequently in France? Your not nicking all the vino are you?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[L' Hobo]

Why do you go to the loo frequently in France? Your not nicking all the vino are you?

It's, probably, where the Gins stored?

 

[PaulW2]

Because no state healthcare? If you crash a bike in the US, the government will maybe brush you to the side of the road if you can’t crawl there yourself.

Maybe. If we go back to our earlier posts I said that notions of socialism often underpin it, and that the NHS (for good or bad - I think both) is a socialist institution at the patient interface level.

You replied that it wasn't about socialism but a general societal problem.

But the counterexamples (eg the US states) show that there is something else at play. I think here, in this instance, it is socialism that underpins the distinction. (There are of course also other ways in which the collective dominates the individual.)

This I can completely agree with. It’s somewhat a function of beuracracy though. It’s also not (in itself but also generally) a good argument to ignore laws. Nor is it a good defence in court.

I think it is actually one of very few good arguments for judiciously 'contextualising', or at least not being overly hamstrung by, laws.

What, for instance, to do when the law is an ass? History is naturally full of extreme examples. Everything done under slavery, or the nazi regime, or the soviets, or in colonial regimes, or apartheid, or latterly Xi's China and Putin's Russia, is or was done in accordance with the laws that were passed. And what to do when the law is whatever the big kahuna - Trump for example, or Maduro, or Bukele, or Kim whatshisface - wakes up saying it is?

There is a very long and detailed argument here of course. But note how often we, in this parish, have interminable debates about points of UK or European law pertaining to the operation of our vehicles. The simplest thing. Using a vehicle. What chance do we then have of ever properly understanding the many thousands of pages of law that have a bearing on us in our daily lives?

And what just happened in the courts? Were transgender people just put back in their natal boxes? Yesterday a woman, today a man? Has the whole world shifted on its axis? Won't this rapid rewiring of my brain cause a nosebleed?

Or do I just accept that there is a real world, and real issues, out there, that I need to take a responsible view on it and just acknowledge that there are people I disagree with everywhere including, sometimes, the people who pour out a constant flood of regulatory effluvium?

 

[tacr2man]

Regarding dates: My daughter was born in 1986 and started school in 1990.

We had fights with the school over lack of seatbelts. They refused to use a coach company that had seat belts because of the cost. I offered to pay the extra cost but they still refused. As a result, whenever there was a need to use coaches, a few of us parents would take our children to and from the destination in our own cars, following the coach. In parallel with that we lobbied our local MP's, appeared on local radio and elicited help from Glenda Jackson. We also lobbied the coach industry. If people don't use seatbelts where they are available they are putting other people at risk.

Moving around in a motorhome whilst it is in motion is a danger to everyone in the vehicle and as stated by others, it's illegal. Why anyone would choose to do it baffles me

I wonder if by using several private cars you had increased the risk to the children statistically rather than just leaving them on the coach ?

 

[The Saints]

The assessment of risk

I wonder if by using several private cars you had increased the risk to the children statistically rather than just leaving them on the coach ?

The assessment of risk has two main elements...

1. The probabilty of occurrence

2. The severity of impact

So the probabilty of a collision will rise if the number of vehicles involved increases.

But the severity of impact ie. the probable injuries, will be much less if the occupants are belted.

I did the same when my kids were at school, they always went with me if the bus didn't have belts or there were three to a seat.

 

[L' Hobo]

I wonder if by using several private cars you had increased the risk to the children statistically rather than just leaving them on the coach ?

I wondered that too as Coaches have a very low fatal accident record on a par with Airliners in Britain but both make headlines if it does happen.

I do admire their persistence though, as I mentioned earlier, to forefill a private school bus contract terms, I installed seatbelts to one of my buses at a high cost and, as the CCTV showed, NONE of them were used (3 damaged but none used)

The School tried to make my company driver responsible for making the children use them.

I pointed out that manoeuvring a Double Decker bus in Hampton Court area traffic during rush hour, made that impossible BUT we were more than happy IF a teacher OR parent wanted to travel on the bus and take on that role and responsibility.

None were forthcoming!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}