Discussion
Hi
With the new law coming in regarding kids in the back seat having to sit on booster seats, what do we do. I understand that if they are under 12 years old / a certain weight -height then it is compulsary for them to have the seats.
What fits the Cerb seats. I have a 7 & 10 year old who only just fit in the back now?
Any thoughts?
With the new law coming in regarding kids in the back seat having to sit on booster seats, what do we do. I understand that if they are under 12 years old / a certain weight -height then it is compulsary for them to have the seats.
What fits the Cerb seats. I have a 7 & 10 year old who only just fit in the back now?
Any thoughts?
My 8 year old son is 134Cm tall - I believe the height limit is 135cm so I should be ok as he's near enough. This is lucky as I couldn't find a single seat at halfords that fitted the rear seat on the Cerbera.
More details are here
www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/childcarseats/childcarseats.htm
More details are here
www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/childcarseats/childcarseats.htm
If you have two cars, one of which is a Cerb, and you normally pick up the kids in the other one, but for some reason it fails to start 5 minutes before you are due to pick up your kid, and there have been reports of strange people lurking around the school, then I would imagine that having to pick up the kid in the Cerb would be classed as an unplanned trip, an emergency, and therefore the lack of booster seat would be irrelevant.
Does anyone REALLY think this useless chunk of nannyism will be policed? Even Ladyman pretty much admitted on Chris Evans show that he expected people to ignore it, and he'd have to bring in further measures to force compliance if people insisted on treating their children like crash test dummies.
Personally I prefer driving in a responsible, defensive and safe manner to ensure that my charges are never involved in an accident. Strapping them in to reduce injury when the inevitable accident occurs smacks more of using them as crash test dummies to me.
Does anyone REALLY think this useless chunk of nannyism will be policed? Even Ladyman pretty much admitted on Chris Evans show that he expected people to ignore it, and he'd have to bring in further measures to force compliance if people insisted on treating their children like crash test dummies.
Personally I prefer driving in a responsible, defensive and safe manner to ensure that my charges are never involved in an accident. Strapping them in to reduce injury when the inevitable accident occurs smacks more of using them as crash test dummies to me.
You cant fashion your own booster - see below.
14. What about rear facing seats in the back of estate cars, or small seats with forward facing seats in sports cars?
Some estate cars have rear facing seats in the luggage compartment for use by children, and some 2 + 2 sports cars or convertibles have small rear seats. Child seats/boosters to the required UN ECE Regulation 44.03 type approval must be used on these seats. However, it may be that such seats are certified to UN ECE 44.03 type approval standards which means that they are in effect type-approved child seats/booster seats themselves and therefore a separate child seat/booster would not be needed. If a seat complies with the type-approval standard, it will have an "E" label, with "44.03" or ".03" and the weight range of the child for which it is designed. You may need to check with the car handbook, or the vehicle manufacturer, whether the seat is so approved.
14. What about rear facing seats in the back of estate cars, or small seats with forward facing seats in sports cars?
Some estate cars have rear facing seats in the luggage compartment for use by children, and some 2 + 2 sports cars or convertibles have small rear seats. Child seats/boosters to the required UN ECE Regulation 44.03 type approval must be used on these seats. However, it may be that such seats are certified to UN ECE 44.03 type approval standards which means that they are in effect type-approved child seats/booster seats themselves and therefore a separate child seat/booster would not be needed. If a seat complies with the type-approval standard, it will have an "E" label, with "44.03" or ".03" and the weight range of the child for which it is designed. You may need to check with the car handbook, or the vehicle manufacturer, whether the seat is so approved.
TT Tim said:
Odd, I replied to this and it's not come up, anyway, here it is again. 
I've been thinking about this...
They don't say that the booster seat has to meet certain standards, but I may be wrong, but how about using a 2-pak blown foam seat for the sprogs in the back?
Might be the cheapest and easiest solution.
Tim
I've been thinking about this...
They don't say that the booster seat has to meet certain standards, but I may be wrong, but how about using a 2-pak blown foam seat for the sprogs in the back?
Might be the cheapest and easiest solution.
Tim
Read my post above - it must conform !
Here is an email response I got from the DoT:
"A correct child restraint is one that is approved to UN-ECE Regulation 44.03 or later (you will find an approval mark somewhere on the shell of the restraint that will tell you this) in the weight category that is appropriate for your child's weight and size. It should be correctly installed in your vehicle in accordance with the manufacturers instructions. The need for a child restraint does not disappear if a child restraint doesn't fit due to the design of the small rear row of seats in this case. Practically, it means that it is more difficult to find a child seat that fits, or that a child cannot be seated in that position."
It makes me wonder whether what they are trying to enforce is altogether legal, forcing people who are law abiding to break the law the very next day? My argument was that I am no longer empowered to provide a (non-existent) child seat for my kids - why don't they fine the car seat manufacturers instead? The DoT people I spoke to saw the logic but essentially said I was too much of a minority to matter. T*ssers. Will be using the Aussie ISOFix system I had engineered to the chassis when we took the Cerb there - because I know it's properly safe!
"A correct child restraint is one that is approved to UN-ECE Regulation 44.03 or later (you will find an approval mark somewhere on the shell of the restraint that will tell you this) in the weight category that is appropriate for your child's weight and size. It should be correctly installed in your vehicle in accordance with the manufacturers instructions. The need for a child restraint does not disappear if a child restraint doesn't fit due to the design of the small rear row of seats in this case. Practically, it means that it is more difficult to find a child seat that fits, or that a child cannot be seated in that position."
It makes me wonder whether what they are trying to enforce is altogether legal, forcing people who are law abiding to break the law the very next day? My argument was that I am no longer empowered to provide a (non-existent) child seat for my kids - why don't they fine the car seat manufacturers instead? The DoT people I spoke to saw the logic but essentially said I was too much of a minority to matter. T*ssers. Will be using the Aussie ISOFix system I had engineered to the chassis when we took the Cerb there - because I know it's properly safe!
kayzed said:
Doubt you'd get that approved. Problem for us is our boy has been too big for a booster since he was around 2 - his head hits the rear glass.
I cant see how it would be illegal - if you could remove the rear upright sections of the rear seats and then attach a couple of approved booster seats (ie they will then sit further back). the seat belt would probably work well enough. Bobs your uncle.
It looks like a belt adjuster may be ok:
"Seat belt adjusters are comfort devices and not safety devices (check what the manufacturer says about them and their intended use). Only if an adjuster is labelled that it has been approved (and therefore tested) to the UN ECE Regulation 44.03 type-approval standard can it used instead of a type-approved child seat/booster."
So, find one of them! There was one on Dragon's Den the other night, on sale here: www.autosafeproducts.co.uk/heightadjuster.html
Ian
"Seat belt adjusters are comfort devices and not safety devices (check what the manufacturer says about them and their intended use). Only if an adjuster is labelled that it has been approved (and therefore tested) to the UN ECE Regulation 44.03 type-approval standard can it used instead of a type-approved child seat/booster."
So, find one of them! There was one on Dragon's Den the other night, on sale here: www.autosafeproducts.co.uk/heightadjuster.html
Ian
That's too sensible gazzab lol! I'm sure they'd say something like the rule is the seat must be in an existing seat of the car. I dealt with the DoT quite a bit and even wrote a letter to the MP but they basically told me it would no longer be legal to travel in the car with my kids. P*ssed me off so much have decided to do what's safest rather than pander to ridiculous technicalities not designed to target people like me anyway! Karen
Halfords still sell the Safety 1st belt adjuster which I have used for my eldest since she was around 2 3/4. While they don't say it's approved, they don't say it isn't though. I've noticed that Halfords have dropped some lines of car seat ready for the new legislation, so it may just be OK...
Edited by Tripps on Tuesday 19th September 14:27
www.safety1st.com/product.asp?productID=218
Says its crash tested but doesn't say whether its to the specified standard.
Says its crash tested but doesn't say whether its to the specified standard.
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff