A question from one of our online Foundation candidates:
“On the question about who Is responsible for an in car installation I would argue that each was jointly and severaly responsible as a:- the installer has a duty of care to install safely. b:- the licensee is duty bound by his licence not to cause interference. c:- the car owner for not checking himself before driving off“
An interesting question. I’m no legal expert on this, so this is a personal opinion:
I can certainly see the logic of the argument, but here’s my take:
- Any work done on a vehicle has to be authorised by the vehicle owner, and that person has an obligation to ensure that anything that’s done to their car has been done by someone competent.
- Certain types of modification to vehicles needs to be notified to the insurance company. Failure to declare modifications may invalidate the insurance. Driving without insurance is illegal.
- Let’s assume that the person installing it is a personal friend who is used to installing car sound systems. You ask him to install a radio. He does just that, but he has no clue about amateur radio. Let’s assume that the presence of 50 watts of RF on a specific frequency upsets the ABS on your vehicle and you have an accident. Who is legally responsible? The installer could quite rightly say that all he did was mount a box you gave him and connect it to 12V (like he’d do with an in-car sound system), and that it was your responsibility to ensure it was a) suitable, b) compatible, and c) that you had notified your the insurer.
Let’s take a more extreme example of modification – let’s assume you have modified your car to install blue neon lights under the vehicle. The legality of using these in the UK seems to be questionable, and from what I’ve read online, this type of modification would almost certainly invalidate the insurance. There are several other modifications that impact vehicle safety. So, who is legally responsible if there’s an accident? The installer for doing what you asked? The member of the family who borrowed the car to drive to the shops? Or the owner for allowing an uninsured vehicle (with a possibly illegal modification) to be driven? I’m no lawyer, but I suspect it comes down to the owner.
Exam Syllabus
Regardless, for the purposes of this exam, at the time of writing, Section 6F1 of the Foundation syllabus states:
“Recall that it is the vehicle owner’s responsibility to ensure that any radio installation is compatible with the vehicles electrical and management systems and does not affect vehicle safety. Recall that the fact of the installation may have to be disclosed to the vehicle insurers. Recall that professional advice should be sought for all vehicle installations.”
Just my personal opinion – others may disagree, but in the interests of passing the Foundation exam, the text above is what the examiners are testing you on.
UK Law
If you’re interested in checking into the actual law, it’s in the “Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002” – Part 4, 16 (1) covers alteration of vehicles, making it clear that it’s the “registered keeper” who is responsible for notifications about modifications, so under UK motoring law, it’s not drivers, passengers or installers.
Passenger?
We received a follow-up comment:
“If a Licensed Ham passenger keyed up a handheld radio and caused a car to crash, then who is responsible? “
First off, the syllabus item is about the installation, not the operation.
Secondly, what’s being asked here, is who’s legally responsible for the actions of a passenger – whether it’s keying up, causing a dangerous distraction to the driver, or them applying the handbrake whilst you’re driving at 70mph. A quick search reveals: “As a driver, you are responsible for the safety of your passengers and others on the road. When faced with a situation where your passenger is becoming a dangerous distraction, it is imperative that you do everything in your power to avoid an accident.”
Personally, I still feel that if the owner has a device installed that potentially poses a risk to the safety of the vehicle (and invalidates insurance), then it’s the owner’s responsibility, not the passenger’s fault for using the device. Will a passenger be fully aware of the electrical and management systems of the vehicle they’ve just got into, or the terms of the owner’s insurance policy?
Your thoughts?
The above are just the author’s personal opinion. Got a different opinion? Please share it by adding a comment below.
Our online courses are FREE. There are no live lessons and you study at a time to suit you. Start dates:
Firstly I agree with you totally – the test is on the syllabus, and that is very clear as you say.
I guess this is one of those that can be modified by unclear assumptions. For example the motor trade has a rule “if you make a trader aware that you want the goods to be fit for a particular purpose, even if it is something that they are not usually supplied for, then you have the right to expect they are fit for that purpose” and that will hold up in a court of law. Also the owner may have the responsibility for ensuring that an installation is fit for purpose, but assuming the above they can also take action against the trader who fitted said goods. And lastly the driver is always responsible for the vehicle and it’s condition, this is a very clear rule of law. If you drive a vehicle that is defective (e.g. bald tyres) then you are the one who will be fined and have points on your licence. If as you suggest an installation of a radio caused a failure of the ABS, then the driver at the time is responsible – even if they could subsequently sue the owner and the installer for any loss.
So I think this is one of those questions that could be subject to assumptions and interpretations. The syllabus is clear however so for the purposes of the exam there is only the one answer as you say. In the real world there will be more shades of grey I suspect.