Front seat belts and MoT

If an inertia reel seat belt doesn’t ‘lock’ when pulled, this is a Reason for Rejection (RfR).

There is no requirement to assess whether an inertia reel belt ‘locks’ when you tug on it. However, some testers have used RfR 5 in Section 5.2 for this (“The locking mechanism of a seat belt does not secure or release as intended”) even though this is only meant for the seat belt buckle mechanism.
 
If an inertia reel seat belt doesn’t ‘lock’ when pulled, this is a Reason for Rejection (RfR).

There is no requirement to assess whether an inertia reel belt ‘locks’ when you tug on it. However, some testers have used RfR 5 in Section 5.2 for this (“The locking mechanism of a seat belt does not secure or release as intended”) even though this is only meant for the seat belt buckle mechanism.

So it's only part of the test if the tester doesn't know what he's doing then.
 
looks like that harvey I stand corrected, I have seen my own MOT tester do this that is why I thought it was part of the test I was wrong,
but looks like lots of mot testers are to very interesting stuff
 
I think that possibly back in the day when the brakes were tested on roadtest with a Tapley meter, then checking that the setbelts at the same time may have been part of the test then, but once the roadtest portion of the test went, that went as well. Even though roadtests are still permitted in certain circumstances IIRC.

I've got a truck that can't have the rear brakes done separately on the rollers because it has an LSD, and permanent 4x4's cant have the handbrake checked for similar reasons.
 
Could well be harvey,
2.6 Seatbelts
The vehicle will be inspected to check that:

the mandatory seatbelts are in place
they are suitable for the vehicle
they are in a good condition
they work properly
they are attached securely
The malfunction indicator lamps (MILs) or dashboard warning lights will be checked for the:

air bags
seatbelt pretensioners (which remove the slack from a seatbelt in the event of a collision)
seatbelt load limiters (which release a small amount of belt when it’s too tight)

it mentions "work properly" but if it is not locking on the reel you would think that it would come
under this but apparently not
 
Re Tapley meters, they are indeed still in use. Only two days ago my 2013 Audi Quattro was tested with a Tapley meter as it was 4WD.
 
I remember using them all the time over 40 years ago. I'd like to have one just for old times sake..
 
We have a tapley as well as back up if our roller fail ( only can use that for 2 days )
We can test 4× 4 s on our rollers unless it's got a locked diff.
 
Just had my more modern Ford B Max in for its second MoT. Watched carefully how the belts were tested. Tester did not check that the reel locked as webbing pulled out . After the test I asked about checking that the reel locked. He stated DVSA now advise testers not the try to lock the reel as modern vehicles can show error messaged / warning light if this is carried out, so it is not part of the test.
 
Using technology to make things better/safer strikes again. When will they learn that tech and sensors are not always the answer, sometimes they cause more problems than they solve.
 
From what I've seen of modern cars and their tech they DO work very well and are a lot safer. Time moves on.
 
The car has now passed the MoT test with no advisories. The tester was happy with the explanation in the owner's handbook - thanks roverp480.
 
just checked my front belts . inertia reel as I think original ( 1974) both do NOT lock when tugging sharply on belt.. as car normally sailed through on that part of test was worried that BOTH belts had packed up! seems they may ..just be the type that need to have sharply decelerating car to engage . I am thinking of changing them both as I prefer 'Knowing' they belts will lock when tugged AND in any impact. such as sudden deceleration. not cheap from what I can see and am tempted to pop to a breakers. when lockdown is over but may change my mind later. pity thi ssort of information isn't clear eg Rover car year ... is fitted with .type etc still even if it passes an MOT with current 'non tugging-licking' belts I will feel safer if belts DO lock when tugged. personal taste I guess.
 
I like your style Classicalgreen its a strange lots of mot inspectors tugging belts but not part of a MoT :oops:
So why mot inspector Tugg at my belt :mad:

 
Last edited:
What fun! I am involved in kit cars here in Oz (Vic), and their testing regime can be problematic sometimes. These cars, known as ICVs (Individually Constructed Vehicles) range from completely scratch built from raw materials to those built from kits, with professionally welded chassis. Unfortunately the testing rules vary from state to state leading to some more interstate jealousy. They need to be inspected by specifically licensed engineers before the registering authorities will look at them. Some of the fails produce interesting reading, like 'Centre brake light must be mounted in the top of the rollover bar' and one guy insisted that all bolts should protrude 3 threads through their nuts. Nuts to that. We do some stuff that is not done on such cars in UK - a chassis torsion test that shows a stiffness of at least 4000Nm/degree, with no serious bumps in the graph. Our car below achieved 5600NM/d.
7mMJ9E3.jpg

I spent several years in Saudi, and saw first hand their version of an MOT - only required on change of ownership. The testing stations are run by the state, and are pretty efficient. After doing initial paperwork, the car is handed over to an inspector. Its driven into a test line, and between the driver and an assistant its inspected for all the obvious things light interior controls, external fittings and lights all function. The process is triggered by overhead signs - Lights on low beam - a robot passes across the front and back, Lights on high beam - robot again. Proceed to brake rollers - apply foot brake - brake force and balance is tested, AND the rollers also measure the front toe-in. Rear axle on rollers - apply foot brake, apply hand brake. Drive over pit - assistant underneath with light checks cable, hoses, steering joints while driver moves wheel. Fails underneath are highlighted with spray paint. While its nowhere near the detail of a UK MOT, or an Oz RWC, its pretty comprehensive considering the state of the fleet there. Best fail I saw was a crutch gaffer-taped to the clutch pedal. Some of the common fails produced some hurried wheel borrowing - mixed tyre sizes are a fail, even when the mix is widths of 255mm and 10" sections.
 
Back
Top