I see no mention on websites dealing with child car seat law in the UK of the legalities of sitting an adult between two child seats on the rear bench.
Especially given that the child seats we use in my wife's 306 have inverted "T" legs extending in to the rear foot wells and that these legs run pretty well flush with the backs of the front seats, I think it's bloody daft to even think about seating an adult between them. Having proven that it's possible for the 16 year old in question to clamber through from the front seats and to use the seat belt, this is however exactly what my missus intends to do this weekend.
Unfortunately, the parents don't mind (until the car is tits up of course) so any legal pointers to re-enforce common sense would be appreciated. SWMBO is normally perfectly sensible so the overwhelming desire to put a day out in front of such common sense has come as a bit of a shock!
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,083
If the car has three seatbelts in the rear and the centre belt can be fastened, unfastened and function normally then it is perfectly legal for an adult to use the centre seat.
Depends on the car. I've been sandwiched between the child seats in my Wife's Mazda 6. Not overly comfortable but not too bad really. I couldn't imagine it in smaller cars though. The only downside is having to entertain the little monsters for the whole journey.
Thanks for the replies (both entertaining and serious!)
Yes, the centre three point inertia reel belt functions properly. A shame it's therefore believed legal as I still think it' dubious on safety grounds!
As long as when you strapped them down that you didn't inhibit the flaps, no problem. Little cold outside though. Hope you at least dressed them warmly.
My initial response to your post was to think is this one of those idiots who drives around with a sticker on the back window of the car saying "baby on board?
The point being that if you think I am going to be any more or less careful just because a baby is on board is insulting and patronising.
Suffice it to say I am rather keen on my own life and fly and drive with the aim of keeping alive and according all other drivers, passengers (babies and toddlers included) and pilots the same right to life, safety and courtesy.
I have 1257 hours flying time (as of yesterday) of which only 15 hrs have included flying anyone younger than 7 as a passenger (I checked my log so nettled was I by your response).
I have never flown with a baby on board so this particular regulation is not highly prioritised in my encyclopaedic memory of all the regs.
The youngest person I have flown was five (my son actually but hey what do I care about him) and I simply ensured he was strapped in securely in an appropriate seat next to a competent adult after having worked out the weight and balance.
Having become increasingly less nettled, I noticed the prefix Kiwi and I thought to myself that most Kiwis I have met have been courteous and not idiots, so I checked your profile and read some of your posts and you don't appear to be an idiot.
I must have assume that my use of the word winged it implied a cavalier approach to flying, life and limb etc. Please accept my word that I attempt to fly as professionally as I can at all times. If my use of the word "winged" or even my question implied anything else I am sorry.
It did appear to me, upon reading your post, that you had taken infants for flights, and when being asked about the rules weren't too sure so just "winged it" ie let them sit on a parent's lap.
Don't take it personally - there ARE people out there like that and as you've not been on here long I hadn't sussed you out yet. I have an intense dislike for young (I'm gonna get flamed for that one) instructors with faff all knowledge who bluff their way thru shite to save face, rather than go and ask someone for the correct information.
So I apologise that you took offense.
I too disliked the "Baby on Board" stickers for the exact same thing you mentioned - until my Police friends pointed out that it's more there to notify anyone in case of an accident that they need to look for said infant. How many times have we heard of incidents where there HAS been an accident and the baby has only been discovered because it started crying?
For the record, I also fly with the aim of preserving my body and those I love! (The same could not be said for my socialising.. )
However, we can't stop someone else from smacking into us. (Albeit, obviously more likely in a road vehicle than in the air, but you get my point). So, much like you, when I take my Chicklets flying I buckle them in, but as my youngest was only two when I first got my licence, she was in the appropriate child restraint seat. As per my NZ AIP Volume 1...
Not sure why I initially took your post personally. Maybe I am just becoming a grumpy old . I am normally fairly laid back.
No apologies required.
Your care and obvious flying diligence does you credit. I will go and look up the appropriate UK regulation and then assiduously avoid carrying babies if at all possible, nasty, smelly, noisy, expensive, lovable and cute little creatures that they are.
Quote:
I too disliked the "Baby on Board" stickers for the exact same thing you mentioned - until my Police friends pointed out that it's more there to notify anyone in case of an accident that they need to look for said infant. How many times have we heard of incidents where there HAS been an accident and the baby has only been discovered because it started crying?
I had not considered that point and will switch my tolerance meter up to 11 out of ten (done).
My initial response to your post was to think is this one of those idiots who drives around with a sticker on the back window of the car saying "baby on board?
NamibFox firstly I am not an idiot, yet I drive around with a baby on bard sign.
I dont expect you to drive any better / worse. I strongly suspect you drive like a t**t anyway.
I drive with one of those signs for the exact reason stated by Kiwi chick. If I, due to incapacitation am unable to tell anyone I may not be the only person in a xcrashed car, I need another way of doing it....do I not??
I drive with one of those signs for the exact reason stated by Kiwi chick. If I, due to incapacitation am unable to tell anyone I may not be the only person in a xcrashed car, I need another way of doing it....do I not??
... and in line with your total reasonableness and caring attitude you ALWAYS ensure that ther sticker is removed when you DO NOT have the sprog on board don't you? I mean we wouldn't want a member of the rescue services rsiking his/her life trying to find a non-existent infant in a burning car because some tw@t hadn't removed the sticker would we?
You obviously remove the sign every time the infant is not onboard!
Otherwise it would complete defeat your (the) purpose.
Or like 99% of all other 'Baby Onboard' drivers, you merely leave it swinging in the rear window.
By-the-way, I know many (too many) emergency personnel, and not once has a decision be made or altered because they found a 'Baby/infant/Grandparent/Little Devil' (delete where applicable) sign at the scene of a RTA.
Quote:
...the centre three point inertia reel belt functions properly
and
Quote:
Can you not move the off-side child seat to the middle and seat the teenager in the off-side seat?
Nope. As described, the seats have an inverted "T" leg that extends in to the footwell and which serves to lift the base of the child seat clear of the adult bench save where it touches for the rear few inches. The result is far more secure than if it were free to wobble on the bench but the downside is that these seats cannot be used in the middle of the bench because of the "prop shaft" tunnel.
(BTW in the V70 it still isn't possible to climb out from the center without using the same technique as the 306. In fact, it still isn't possible in my brother's XC90 though at least the centre console lifts out making it very easy and less of a safety hazard)
)
)
. I am normally fairly laid back.
