Seatbelts became law 40 years ago but too many don’t belt up
>
On January 31, 1983, it became a legal requirement in Britain for drivers and front passengers to wear seat belts.
Forty years later, nearly a quarter of motorists believe that too many motorists continue to ignore the law — and that this is a major contributor to the number of accidental deaths — and demand tougher penalties for offenders, a new study says.
Some 24 per cent of 1,800 UK drivers surveyed by the RAC said the existing maximum fine of £500 is not a deterrent enough, with more than two-thirds (69 per cent) calling for three demerit points for drivers caught not wearing seatbelts .
The survey found that one in 25 admitted to driving without a belt in the past year and came in the same month Rishi Sunak was given a fixed sentence by Lancashire Police, after a clip on social media showed the Prime Minister not wearing a seatbelt in the back of a vehicle.
Drivers call on government to tighten up seat belt offences: Nearly a quarter of motorists believe existing fines of up to £500 for offenders are too lenient as today marks the 40th anniversary of safety devices being required by law in Britain are
While in 1983 the law was changed so that drivers and front passengers were legally required to wear their seatbelts, it was not until 1989 that it became mandatory for children 14 and under to wear a seatbelt in the back of a car.
It was not until two years later, in 1991, that the legal obligation to wear the safety equipment was extended to all occupants of the vehicle.
But despite laws that date back four decades, the number of drivers and passengers killed on our roads if they don’t wear seatbelts is the highest since records began.
Of the number of people killed in accidents on UK roads in 2021, Department for Transport statistics show that 30 per cent were not wearing seatbelts (the largest share according to 2013 data).
Katherine Fletcher, the former DfT Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, responded to the DfT’s statistics on the number of road casualties published in October.
The Conservative MP for South Ribble added that the government was ‘considering options to deal with this, including the potential merits of introducing demerit points’.
She went on to say that changing the rules to allow drivers and passengers to get points “could be part of the Department of Transport’s planned appeal for evidence of traffic violations.”
According to drivers surveyed by the RAC, more than two-thirds (68 per cent) believe the rules should change so that the person behind the wheel of a vehicle is responsible for ensuring that all their passengers wear the safety features.
UK drivers are currently only required to fasten themselves and children under 14, with older passengers responsible for securing.
One in 25 people admitted to driving without a seatbelt in the past 12 months, with 22 percent saying they were not wearing a seatbelt on at least half of their journeys.
While seat belts are a legal requirement for all vehicle occupants, there are some exceptions, such as a driver reversing; a vehicle used for police, fire or rescue services; or a delivery person who does not travel more than 50 meters between stops.
The maximum fine for not wearing a seatbelt is £500, but violators are usually given a fixed fine of £100.
And these fines can be waived if an offender agrees to attend a £53 awareness course instead.
Under existing rules, both drivers and passengers over the age of 14 who are caught by police not wearing a seatbelt will be fined £100 or required to take a £53 safety awareness course
More than a third (36 per cent) of motorists surveyed by the RAC said seatbelt enforcement should increase, which would mean increasing policing or allowing the use of camera-based technology.
The latter is already being tested by Warwickshire Police in conjunction with National Highway using a specially modified van that can record passing vehicles using cameras mounted on a large metal structure extending from the roof.
Footage captured by the Big Brother bus is being analyzed by artificial intelligence and humans to determine whether motorists were using a cellular phone or if anyone in the vehicle was not wearing a seatbelt.
In its first 64 hours of operation last year, the van identified 512 people without seatbelts while traveling on the M40 and A46, National Highways said.
On the hunt: The ‘Big Brother’ van was used by Warwickshire Police in 2022 to track down traffic offences. In the first 64 hours of use, it caught more than 500 people who weren’t strapped in
Today’s anniversary is the ideal time for the government to show its seriousness in improving safety on our roads and to put in place an action plan to ensure that more of us are in the first place. put on their seatbelts,” said RAC road safety spokesman Simon Williams.
“Getting in a car and putting on a seatbelt is second nature to most people, but it is clear that more needs to be done to get those who have not developed this habit to change their ways.
“Our research shows that motorists are clearly in favor of higher penalties, which we know the government is considering.
“But tightening up the law is not enough: drivers must first of all think that there is a good chance of being caught.”
AA President Edmund King added: ‘The humble seatbelts may be one of the greatest inventions in road safety, but they are pointless unless people wear them.
“A fine for not wearing a seatbelt is simply not enough and we will continue to push for more government attention on what interventions can be useful to improve compliance with this life-saving law.
“This could include demerit points for any vehicle occupant of legal age caught not wearing a seatbelt.”
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was fined by Lancashire police days after he was spotted without a seatbelt in an Instagram video he filmed traveling as a passenger in a moving car while visiting the county on January 19.
Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on it, we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money and use it for free. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to compromise our editorial independence.