OHTA.ca

Situation: Truck, for personal use, registered as a pickup truck, from the factory equipped with benches on the cargo bed intended to carry 18 troops. Model year is 1974, no seatbelts from the factory.

The question is, am I allowed to carry passengers in the back, in the manner intended, without seatbelts? If so, how many?

Not adding any info, but I asked three different officers (2 Ottawa police and 1 OPP and received 3 divergent opinions).

use of seat belt assembly by passenger

(3) Every person who is at least 16 years old and is a passenger in a motor vehicle on a highway shall,

(a) occupy a seating position for which a seat belt assembly has been provided; and

(b) wear the complete seat belt assembly as required by subsection (5). 2006, c. 25, s. 1.

There is some exemptions for vehicles manufactured with out seatbelts but I interpret this to mean in the passenger compartment.

Based on this I would ticket you for anyone riding in the bed.

If you thought you were charged incorrectly you could chose to fight it and let the JP decide.

OPS Copper

cattlerepairman wrote:Not adding any info, but I asked three different officers (2 Ottawa police and 1 OPP and received 3 divergent opinions).

Well I think this answers the question. Depending on the officer you may or may not get away with it without getting a ticket so you'll have to weigh your options on this one. If only all laws could be this black and white

(a) occupy a seating position for which a seat belt assembly has been provided

You can drive any car that came from the factory without seat belts and this is no different, this is my point of view.

Based on the situation described (benches that were factory-installed) I'd say you'd be okay, from a "final verdict" point of view. The problem is...

cattlerepairman wrote:I asked three different officers... and received 3 divergent opinions.

So your passengers may be ticketed... or you may be ticketed if any of your passengers are under the age of 16.

Sorry we couldn't provide a straightforward answer. The law is clear as mud at the best of times, and enforcement of it (largely for that reason) is not always consistent.

I would direct you to O/Reg. 613.

10. Where a motor vehicle manufactured without seat belt assemblies for each seating position and not modified so that there is a seat belt assembly for each seating position is driven on a highway,

(a) the driver is exempt from the requirement of subsection 106 (2) of the Act to wear a seat belt assembly if there is no seat belt assembly at the drivers seating position;

(b) a passenger is exempt from the requirement of subsection 106 (3) of the Act to wear a seat belt assembly if the passenger occupies a position without a seat belt assembly and there is no other available seating position with a seat belt assembly; and

(c) the driver is exempt from clause 106 (4) (a) of the Act with respect to any passenger described in clause (b). O. Reg. 522/06, s. 10.

Seems pretty clear to me that it is permissible, but you should probably carry a laminated copy of this section in the vehicle.

Again i would interpret it to mean the passenger compartment and would charge..If you charged incorrectly I would gladly be in court to defend it..

It is a gray area. but I would charge, laminated copy of the section or not.

OPS

OPS Copper wrote:Again i would interpret it to mean the passenger compartment and would charge

Can you elaborate on how you interpret this as applying to the passenger compartment only?

Certainly this is where you usually find seats for passengers, but the wording of the section carefully omits any reference to the passenger compartment.

Section 10 (b) states: "passenger occupies a position without a seat belt assembly."

So I would suggest that as long as the "position" satisfies the criteria in section 10 of "a motor vehicle manufactured without seat belt assemblies for each seating position", then it doesn't matter where that seat is, as long as it came that way from the factory.

I agree with Simon. I think he's interpreted that section correctly.

But clearly that is not going to stop an officer from trying to ticket you anyways, as OPS copper clearly shows, he has his opinion and he will stick to it and ticket you anyway, regardless of what the section should actually be interpreted as.

So unfortunately there is no guarantee you won't be ticketed but it is very likely you will beat this charge every time in court. but is it worth it?

Flawed system...

Thank you for your valued opinions! My intention is not to endanger any passengers or break an obvious regulatory provision.

I have used and intend to use the vehicle with passengers on the bed solely on local streets for the purpose of a parade, rememberance day activity and the like. I have no intention to run it like a primitive motor coach on the highway.

At the same time, I did not want to engage in an activity that was clearly out of bounds or leaves my with unmanageable liability.

The answers suggest that an officer may wish to issue an offence notice; however, I now carry a a laminated copy of Regulation 613 10. and 106. in the glove box

Way to be proactive!

What we get from this is: If there are available seats in the cab with seatbelts you must use them first, and while the cab is full then you can sit out back.

If it met guidelines in effect at made date it is ok.

Cheers

Stripe

I had a problem last month... Too many passengers for my pickup. When we were teens, we always had a couple "extras" rolin' around in the box, but this is now, so I called the local police. They told me as long as all the belts were used, extra passengers were free to ride in the box. Of course, EVERY kid called dibs on the box!!

So we head over to the get-together. I have two beers over the course of 3 hours. Time to leave. I know the alcohol wheel would suggest I'm fine to drive, but I'm not taking any chances with the current laws, so I let my son's girlfriend drive. Turns out she's a fairly new driver... and it show's (truck drives straight when I'M driving!... her, not so much).

Couldn't help noticing how screwed up our laws are these days. We have a new(ish) driver, getting constant advice from Canada's Worst Driver (who's too paranoid of current liquor laws to take a chance at the wheel... what is it, one drop from a turkey baster and your loaded?), as we weave down the road (new driver thing) with 3 teenagers in the back... But that's perfectly legal? But don't spin your tires fella' or you're "on the hook!"

Sorry, it's been a while. Just felt the urge to point out how silly the HTA is in some regards.

nice to chuckle with u again.........