You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Does anybody know what actually constitutes use of a phone whilst driving. Giving a specific example, would lifting a phone from the passenger seat to see who is calling, but not answering the phone, be classified as use of the phone?
The local cop shop couldn't answer this question, so thought I'd post here for the fun of it.
It means "using" your phone for ANY function contained on that phone. Your example wouldn't constitute "using", nor would just holding it in your hand.
I thought it was using it while in your hands - so hands free is OK
Directgov provides this:
The law on using hand-held phones and similar devices while driving
THINK!It is illegal to drive a vehicle or ride a motorcycle while using a hand-held mobile phone. This also applies to any similar device (that must be held at some point) to:
send or receive spoken or written messages or still or moving images
access the internetThese devices include smartphones or Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs).
While driving, you must not use your hand-held mobile phone, smartphone or PDA:
to make or receive calls
to send or receive picture and text messages
to access the internet
when you're stopped at traffic lights
when you're queuing in trafficIt’s also illegal to use a hand-held phone when supervising a learner driver or rider.
If you're an employer, you can be prosecuted if you ask your employees to make or receive calls while driving.
Which, well, hmm. It's illegal to receive a text while driving?
I have paid a £60 fine and 3 points so I am now an expert.
Touching your phone whilst driving is "using" your phone,
This avoids any doubt ,
P,S, wait until you get your insurance renewal
That's my understanding, but looking for something a little more formal i suppose. Im thinking on having my day in court as I was charged, ie 3 points , 60 quid for turning the phone over and not answering it. The problem being hiring a solicitor is prohibitively expensive, better to take the hit even when I include the insurance premium hike. the other option is to represent myself in the Scottish courts, no experience of this so unlikely I would be successful. Made a formal complaint which made me feel a little better....
TBH it doesn't seem too reasonable... It's definately "using", and what's the point of checking the number that's calling if you're not considering answering?
Driving instructors that I know put their phones in the boot of the car to avoid any problem.
If only the rest of the world was as sensible.
Within legislation for this offence specific mention is made to the effect that "merely gripping" the phone does not constitute an offence, which is what yours would come under. However, the law being the law... You could have been deemed "not in proper control" of your vehicle.
Also, any function is generally meant to mean any of it's 'communication' functions. Having said that, in my experience if you're playing a game, scrolling menus etc. you'll be found at court.
What about when you are using your phone as a sat nav in a cradle and you press a button to change info?
If you can do that, it's just as easy to press answer and speaker phone... not that I would ever do anything like that.
I know people must press buttons on their regular sat nav's all the time.
my driving instructor was on the phone quite a bit.
you could always be charged with driving without due care and attention if if it made you feel better?
sorry. bad luck by the sounds of it.
there'll be a duty solicitor at the court ( i expect - don't really know about the proper north ). TBH i'd just suck it up and save the bother, which is what most legislation relies on these days.
unless you have the 'hands free', cockroach in the ear job, i would switch it off whilst driving-- it will work again when you switch it back on, and any essential calls , texts will get to you.
On a cycle however its ok....
ac505 - Member
The problem being hiring a solicitor is prohibitively expensive
An initial chat might not cost much and could have told you you were screwed or not (and if you looked at the screen then I'd have thought you were using it).
I have and always use hands free, but wanted to see who was calling. Last time i will do that! Due care and attention is not the charge so whilst I understand your reasoning, it does not come into play here. To be honest, for the sake of £50/yr on the insurance, I may take the hit, going to court and wasting time in doing so does not really excite me...
A dash/windscreen mount and a hands-free system would let you see who was calling and take the call if you want to. I guess that the very act of reaching across to pick up the handset, taking your line-of-sight off the road ahead is the issue. No worse than changing stations on the car radio though!
My insurance went up £200 pa
You are a dick if you do...........that is the law!
£200, ooch!
duntstick - Member
You are a dick if you do...........that is the law!
The perfect answer.
[url= http://www.tesco.com/direct/technology-gaming/bluetooth-accessories/cat3373542.cat#scrollTo=11;pageNo=1 ]Less than a tenner...[/url]
Typical of Britain today really.. Legislation introduced but a definitive statement of the law almost impossible for an average Joe to find so they know what they can and cannot do without being prosecuted.
Personally i really don't like having a phone in the car. prefer to stop for messages and a coffee on business journies. Can't do technical chat and drive well at the same time. Some sympathy for the o p on this as this seems to be a letter of law rather than spirit issue from what has been described and the existence of the requisite Dr Spock ear piece. But that's the chance you take i guess. Especially with screen mounts being so cheap.
I did hear mention of a 1 touch rule coming in at some point. Any action needing more than one button or tap would be illegal. That will rule out just about everything as i have yet to find a phone that can actually obey voice commands. Certainly won't make Bluetooth a priority on my next car.
Typical of Britain today really.. Legislation introduced to stop people being stupid, but people choose to be stupid anyway and argue about the law designed to stop them being stupid instead of simply not being stupid in the first place.
Fixed that bit, just for you.
Not really sure I agree with your amend.
If someone makes an honest error or is accused of an offence then a definitive statement of the law should be readily available to them if nothing else so they know when to not argue the point. Also if someone wishes to ensure they are fully compliant with the law then they should be able to find what they can and cannot do. Arguably a definitive statement of law should reduce the quantity of squinnying that can be entered into by some one who.is caught.
I agree using a hand held mobile and driving is utterly assinine but I would go further and say even hands free phone calls are a menace.
Hand held CB radios are legal to use while driving.
So you turned it over and looked at it rather than the road.
Good luck defending that one 🙂
You were obviously distracted enough not to see the copper.
Typical of Britain today really.. Legislation introduced but a definitive statement of the law almost impossible for an average Joe to find so they know what they can and cannot do without being prosecuted.
If someone makes an honest error or is accused of an offence then a definitive statement of the law should be readily available to them if nothing else so they know when to not argue the point. Also if someone wishes to ensure they are fully compliant with the law then they should be able to find what they can and cannot do. Arguably a definitive statement of law should reduce the quantity of squinnying that can be entered into by some one who.is caught.
Why, can the average Joe not type & press search in Google?
What do you think an act of parliament is if not a definitive statement of the law?
Most acts of parliament are now available to view online. You can also buy copies through HMSO, or order copies at your local library. All court findings are in the public domain and can be searched for caselaw. Or, knock on the door, write a letter, email etc to your local Police or MP and they will be happy to oblige. Seriously, what's hard about that? For example I googled theft + uk law and I got this:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60
It's really that easy.
What I find "typical of Britain today" is that many people think they can decide which laws apply to them, and only abide by those that suits them.
It's a shame that so many more people don't get done. I see people driving on a daily basis yapping away on their phone. Was almost forced off the road in the car by some idiot on completely the wrong side of the road whilst driving.
I'd suggest lighting a fag is far more dangerous than picking up a phone! Still must see five or six folk a day on their phones tho and I only drive 6 miles each way at the moment!
Double post.
Driving instructors that I know put their phones in the boot of the car to avoid any problem.
That's just silly, that would make me far more likely to crash when I try to answer it... 😉
Ok, so letter of the law (well actually the directgov website), I didn't commit any offence. simply turning a phone over is not an offence. I am tempted to take this one further but it comes down to the coppers word v's mine. That said, it does need to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.... Interesting, spoke to the sergeant when I made my complaint, he was all for me taking this one to court and suggested young cops are a little too quick to reach for the tickets as opposed to talking to the public...
Touching your phone whilst driving is "using" your phone,
OK. I'm using it to play music through the stereo. I'm allowed to change tracks or radio station on the stereo, yes? So what's the difference changing tracks on my phone?
I drive a lot and what I can't fathom is all these people in really expensive cars that don't have hands free? Can't be more than a few hundred quid as an option, I'm talking 30+ grand cars.... 😯
myheadsashed - MemberI drive a lot and what I can't fathom is all these people in really expensive cars that don't have hands free? Can't be more than a few hundred quid as an option, I'm talking 30+ grand cars....
You mean like the dicks in 60k + cars I see round here with a phone clamped to their ear most of the time, the ****ing thing comes with built in bluetooth FFS!!!!
the ROSPA stats on use of handsfree kits is interesting as well
A substantial body of research shows that using a hand-held or hands-free mobile phone while driving is a significant distraction, and substantially increases the risk of the driver crashing.
Drivers who use a mobile phone, whether hand-held or hands-free:
are much less aware of what’s happening on the road around them
fail to see road signs
fail to maintain proper lane position and steady speed
are more likely to 'tailgate' the vehicle in front
react more slowly, take longer to brake and longer to stop
are more likely to enter unsafe gaps in traffic
feel more stressed and frustrated.
They are also four times more likely to crash, injuring or killing themselves and other people.
Using a hands-free phone while driving does not significantly reduce the risks because the problems are caused mainly by the mental distraction and divided attention of taking part in a phone conversation at the same time as driving.