litigation support services

Seat Belts

Seat belts have been fitted as standard to motor cars since 1965 at which time most were known as static belts, this meant that they were fixed at both ends with a central fixed length of strapping which was adjusted to the body by pulling the excess belt through a loop to suit your size. The only give in such belts was that in the material itself so that when a collision occurred although the restrained body was held in place the arms, legs and head were free to move as if unbelted. The result was that all the forces of the impact that were acting upon the restrained body went through the 2.5 inches of webbed belt. The injuries sustained by people from these belts was hard to justify in the interests of safety when compared with those injuries suffered without a belt.The inertia reel seat belt was quickly developed and fitted to cars as standard requirement and proved to be much more forgiving and successful. The principle that had failed in the fixed seat belt was in restraining the wearer so tightly. The inertia belt allowed the body to move forward before locking off thus reducing the forces reaching the occupants substantially and of course their injuries. The head, legs and arms were still free to thrash about at will in a collision but the main injury sustained by people in collisions was ‘whiplash’.

Hyper- extension of the neck as the head is thrown forward, backward or to either side distorts the muscles etc. and joints which on returning to what might be considered a normal position are out of alignment so to speak. The damage caused to the soft tissue and on occasions to the bony structure results in pain to the person involved and the claim that person consequently makes through their insurer and or solicitor. In essence the seat belt is the cause of whiplash injuries and keeps us all in work.

If that is the case why are we forced by the laws of the land to wear them? quite simply because the alternative is far less acceptable. As a young police officer in the days before seat belts were an optional extra in cars let alone required by law I saw the most awful injuries suffered by people in comparatively minor accidents. Heads though windscreens, side windows, people impaled on their steering wheels and so on, every injury life threatening making whiplash a pussycat in contrast. Since then manufacturers have seen that their public have become more disconcerting, the massive sales of Volvo’s in the 1980’s just because public perception was that it was the safest car in the world drove them on to develop other injury saving devises such as side impact bars and air bags.

The questions that is raised in connection with seat belts are usually:

was the seat belt being worn?
did it perform correctly?

The first is quite easy to deal with, the severity of the collision does not have to be very great to cause marks on the belt itself. To guide it through its route the seat belt passes through plastic loops, when the seat belt is subject to operation anything up to about 6 inches of belt will pass through these loops at great speed, sufficient to heat the material which melts leaving friction burns on the belt. These burn marks take the form of a glazing to the material and although not always easy to find are proof positive if found that at some point in the vehicles history the belts have been subject to an impact situation.

Deduction with regard to the vehicles history will aid with any doubt that the marks were actually caused in the particular accident with which you are dealing. More difficult is the situation when these marks are not there, the absence of the marks is not proof that the seat belt was not worn or indeed that the accident never happened. It may be that they are simply not visible to the naked eye. Forensic science is then the only resort, off to a lab with the belts is your only hope.

Did they perform correctly is much more difficult to establish, seat belts are tested at the annual MOT of a vehicle. The test is to pull at the fixing points to ensure they are secure and then to pull out the seat belt and at some point give it a sharp tug thereby replicating the sudden impact scenario. Very professional, a calibrated examination of one of the vehicles most important life saving features. Once again it is likely that to prove anything you will need to have the seat belts removes and taken to a Forensic science lab to be tested.

Seat belts of course have only one direction of use, to stop the occupant being throw forward, when they do this Newton’s equal and opposite reacting comes into play again and the occupant is propelled backwards into their seat, thus the need for suitably adjusted head restraints. In a rear impact the occupant is propelled firstly backwards into their seat and then the equal and opposite force propels them forward against their seat belt. It is often worth considering your client or the claimants injury pattern in this regard, many people I interview about their injuries are either confused or simply wrong about the sequence of events leading up to the injuries they suffered and describe what they think is right when in fact they have got things completely wrong.

As with so many features in the investigation of a road traffic accident the simplest of subjects about which few know very much at all tell much of the story, especially if you are concerned with fraudulent claims.

The legislation that covers seat belts from the construction to the wearing is contained within the following:Road Traffic Act 1988

Road Vehicles Construction and Use Regulations 1986 as amended
Motor vehicles (wearing of set belts) regulations 1993
Motor vehicles (wearing of seat belts by children in front seats) regulations 1993Anchorage points

Regulation 46 (1) Construction & Use Regs 1986, apart from exceptions applies to:

Exceptions to the above are shown in Regulation 46 (2) of the same regs and are extensive.

A seat belt is defined as a belt intended to be worn by a person in a vehicle and designed to prevent or lessen injury in the event of an accident occurring and includes in the case of a child restraint any special chair to which the belt is attached. Regulation 47 Con & Use regs details the minimum style of seatbelts required and details the exemptions and maintenance. Defences to these regulations are limited to, the defect occurred on that journey and reasonable steps have been taken to have the defect rectified.

Who is compelled to wear a seat belt is detailed in section 14 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 which allows the Secretary of State to make regulations requiring seat belt use.

It details some definitions:

Light goods vehicle

Small bus

Every adult in the front or rear of a vehicle either:

Exemptions to this requirement are extensive:

Children’s seats and harnesses are covered in section 15(3) Rod Traffic Act 1988.

and The Motor vehicles wearing of seat belts regs 1993. Section 15 (2) Road Traffic Act 1988 covers children carried in the front seats of motorcars.