Tyre rating confusion

[obewan]

Recently there was a thread discussing how often you could 'expect' a puncture.
I said I hadn't had one for years but my wife had picked up 4 in almost as many years.

Today she picked up her fifth, also continuing her remarkable knack of the nail being in the most worn tyre
Anyway, to my question:
2.0L Mazda 3 fitted with 205/60R16 92V
A local independent tyre fitter quoted me for a 96HXL rated tyre.

I queried if this was ok. His reply was an adamant 'yes' as the load rating was higher and the speed rating was still above the maximum speed of the car. No one else local had any 92V in stock, so I went ahead

I've spent a good hour or so on the internet and there are lots of conflicting advice and comments .
Generally it seems to concur that it is ok - comments/statements include:

Insurance companies don't class it as a mod
Winter tyres would have an even lower speed rating
Ford and Merc have stated to customers it's ok
Manufactures over specify the tyres to improve fuel consumption figures

Soon I will need to replace the fronts and would like to keep them all the same
Your thoughts appreciated

 

[NickDE]

H is 130mph. Are planning to going that fast ?

In the UK no one checks. In Germany the tyre rating is part of the registration documents, and you fail the MOT equivalent if lower rated tyres are fitted.

 

[obewan]

H is 130mph. Are planning to going that fast ?

Have to be over a cliff to manage that speed
I think that was his point - I was concerned about the legal aspect really.
Mazda only specify 92V, no alternatives