Hand held mobile phone use penalty to rise in 2017 [Merged]

[ROG]

Consultation = https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... riving.pdf - a lot of LGV mention in that

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37389800 - £200 + 6 points

[mazzer]

The penalties can be raised to whatever but until there is a risk of getting caught then the penalty is pointless, look down next time you are in slow traffic at least 1 in 3 has the phone out texting or checking faceache. The police presence on UK roads is laughable, and when you do see them their driving leaves a lot to be desired, sitting in the middle lane or in one case on the A75 passed a police van where the driver had the phone to his ear. Less reliance on cameras and more visible policing is needed not sneaking about in the latest Audi A6 with no markings.

[ROG]

I was hoping the law would change to a more common sense approach - no mobile phone use of any kind unless vehicle stationary with handbrake applied

[Daross]

2017 if your caught on your phone whilst driving

Will move from 3 - 6 points
£100 - £200

Professionals will receive more!

[muckles]

I was hoping the law would change to a more common sense approach - no mobile phone use of any kind unless vehicle stationary with handbrake applied

Why would this be a more common sense approach?
As the article and Mazzer said there aren't the police out there to detect hand held use, let alone hands free. How are the police going to detect that, by seeing your lips moving when driving? If they did they'd be wasting a lot of time stopping people singing or talking to themselves.

And there are laws that already deal with people who's driving is distracted, whether they are using a hand held or hands free or just not concentrating for other reasons, but again as this can't be detected by cameras and there aren't the police patrols the culprates have very little chance of being caught.

Will these new penalties work, well looking at the graph, maybe for ashore while, but then as the impact and publicity of the new penalties dies down and the actual risk of being caught remains low, the use of hand held phones will creep again.

[bald]

I was hoping the law would change to a more common sense approach - no mobile phone use of any kind unless vehicle stationary with handbrake applied

Altough I know being on the phone, even handsfree, is distracting (try reversing at a bay while on the phone), what about passengers in the car ?

Most people who are talking to each other try to look at each other, every day you see people driving eraticly, because they are talking, arguing with their passengers, shouting at the children at the back seat etc.., so next, a prohibition to carry passengers, or drivers in a special cockpit ?

As for a common sense approach, I know very well to not answer a phone while reversing, during city traffic or at 5 pm on the M6 at Birmingham, I still think I can answer a handsfree phone call while driving on a quiet motorway at 3 am.


Edit; Muckles answer is what I meant, but better worded.

[mrginge]

Professionals will receive more!

Why are they being harsh on lawyers, doctors, accountants etc

[papermonkey]

The penalties can be raised to whatever but until there is a risk of getting caught then the penalty is pointless, look down next time you are in slow traffic at least 1 in 3 has the phone out texting or checking faceache. The police presence on UK roads is laughable, and when you do see them their driving leaves a lot to be desired, sitting in the middle lane or in one case on the A75 passed a police van where the driver had the phone to his ear. Less reliance on cameras and more visible policing is needed not sneaking about in the latest Audi A6 with no markings.

They could have a field day in the evening rush hour on the a14, add tailgating and random lane swapping to the mix, and its a wonder theres not as many accidents as there are already.

[peterm]

It's the same here. Today me and the mrs going to see or son in Brisbane, about 50 miles. What a mob of f*****g donkeys on the road. Wall to wall traffic in three lanes and there's still half wits weaving about all over the place and slowing down/speeding up. Really boils my piss. Nearly got hit up the arse without even slowing down by some prat changing lanes with his phone to his ear. A mate was in my car a couple of weeks ago and asked why he couldn't get a sensible answer out of me; it was because I was concentrating on driving and being a male, I can only do one thing at a time. Seriously though, there's too many idiots that think of driving as something you do while you're doing something more important like texting/phoning. Don't get me started on bleedin' tailgaters.

[dieseldog999]

bottom line...it wont make a blind bit of difference,and only an increase in the cash cow money revenue coffers.sweden for example has no restrictions for mobile use whilst driving and they dont seem to do badly with it over there..id imagine its more distracting trying to use it when driving and thinking your hiding it though personally im quite happy using it myself constantly.(i do have the obligatory limper earpice plus the double neckbrace thingy that the joggers use when i feel like a change),but il just play with it and txt/call ets as and when it suits.the increas in penalty wont make any difference to my usage.

[ROG]

what about passengers in the car ?

Passengers have some idea of what is going on around the vehicle - the person on the end of the phone does not

[James the cat]

what about passengers in the car ?

Passengers have some idea of what is going on around the vehicle

You've not met my misses

[raymundo]

They could have a field day in the evening rush hour on the a14, add tailgating and random lane swapping to the mix, and its a wonder theres not as many accidents as there are already.

??????????????????????????

[Hammy747]

Only way they'll really stop people doing it is to hit people really hard.

Instant 3 month ban and a £1000 fine. Once that new legislation came in the police should be made to have a hardcore purge on it with undercover cars and trucks, would take all of 2 or 3 weeks of countrywide bans to make people really think about wether they really want to risk it.

Unfortunately at the moment, as others have and said and nearly everyone knows, police presence on our roads is a joke. I honestly can't remember the last time I saw a police car (marked, granted I may miss the odd undercover one) on a motorway or dual carriageway.

[eagerbeaver]

" really soup people "

What kind of people would these be? Scared? Maybe they are chicken.

Judging by some drivers, they could be vegetable.

[muckles]

what about passengers in the car ?

Passengers have some idea of what is going on around the vehicle - the person on the end of the phone does not

I doubt if 2 people in a vehicle are engrossed in a conversation to the same level as some who use phone are, that either would react to something happening outside the vehicle until it was too late.

How many collisions are there that don't involve phone use, where the cause is they didn't see in time to react?

[eagerbeaver]

Loads sadly Muckles.

Idiots rubbernecking are the main cause.

[The-Snowman]

Thing is, you can demand a bigger police presence to deal with people on phones but as soon as the cops do it, you get the usual whingers who focus on the revenue earned rather than the fact all those people got caught using their phones while driving.
Look at speeding blitzes. Its the usual story. They could catch 200 people speeding through a road in one day and rather than say "wow, glad they got dealt with. Maybe they'll slow down in future" you get the usual focusing on how much money is raised in fines. The cops are damned if they do and damned if they dont.
My solution would be an abolishing of the fine system and instead its an outright ban. Six months to begin with. Then a year for next offence. Then 18 months for the next one and if caught again they just remove the license and that person never gets to drive again. For this system to work howevr, they'd need to only apply it to vehicles that are actually moving. None of this "still in control" pish even though your in neutral with the hand brake on.

[ROG]

How many collisions are there that don't involve phone use, where the cause is they didn't see in time to react?

Most are caused by a driver not concentrating on the task of driving but allowing themselves to be distracted

[Hammy747]

" really soup people "

What kind of people would these be? Scared? Maybe they are chicken.

Judging by some drivers, they could be vegetable.

Stop not soup! Predictive text is hard one handed while I'm driving down the M1 and stirring my pot of noodles at 56mph!

[muckles]

How many collisions are there that don't involve phone use, where the cause is they didn't see in time to react?

Most are caused by a driver not concentrating on the task of driving but allowing themselves to be distracted

Exactly but they single out phones as a special case, but there are plenty of others things that distract drivers that aren't singles out. When the law on mobile phones was first talked about a traffic copper friend of mine said it was pointless as they already had laws that could deal with people who used phones and making it a special case detracted from the other causes that distracted people.

[Maigret]

How many collisions are there that don't involve phone use, where the cause is they didn't see in time to react?

Most are caused by a driver not concentrating on the task of driving but allowing themselves to be distracted

Exactly but they single out phones as a special case, but there are plenty of others things that distract drivers that aren't singles out. When the law on mobile phones was first talked about a traffic copper friend of mine said it was pointless as they already had laws that could deal with people who used phones and making it a special case detracted from the other causes that distracted people.

Phone use used to be dealt with by the offence of the Driver not being in proper control of the vehicle.

As Magistrates no longer accept the word of a Police officer ( I am not getting into whether this is right or wrong) then the collection of evidence to prosecute a Driver for Molbile phone use - by even Fixed Penalty Notice - becomes more convoluted and therefore much less attractive to the officers on the ground.

It's rapidly coming down to video / photographic evidence or forget it - hence the use of the Police HGV Truck.

As many other contributors have said, if you see a Traffic Cop on the Motorway it's probably a mirage - his control room will probably accuse him of skivving or being lost!

[Maigret]

As an aside - most North West area Traffic Cops will be aware of the Pro-forma sheet that they are requested to submit the Office of the TC should they prosecute a Coomercial Vehicle Driver on a mobile phone. The offender will then, in all likelihood, be asked to make a personal appearance with the possibility of a Vocational Disqualification of 28 days being a frequent result.

[shep532]

For a mobile phone offence in an unknown vehicle (not HGV), if the licence holder has a vocational category they will (or should) receive a warning letter via DVLA advising them their actions are considered below those expected. The letter is on behalf of the TC.

Once the letter had been issued further offences are passed to the TC by DVLA and a disciplinary conduct hearing will be likely.

In a 3 month period 1051 drivers received such a letter. In the same period over 200 of those re-offended and were in front of a TC - or so the government public consultation claimed.

If caught in a HGV - this is reported directly to the TC by DVLA and a conduct hearing will follow.

The Senior TC's statutory document No 6 details the suspension period the driver will receive. If it is apparent the call made in the HGV was work related, there's a high probability the TM/Operator will be in front of a TC as well

[yourhavingalarf]

However...

My understanding is the law does allow emergency calls to be made on 999 and 112.

[shep532]

However...

My understanding is the law does allow emergency calls to be made on 999 and 112.

Yes. Emergency calls can be made hand held whilst driving. Hence Police claim their usage of mobiles is ok because it's an emergency.

[Munchkin]

Stop not soup! Predictive text is hard one handed while I'm driving down the M1 and stirring my pot of noodles at 56mph!


That's a helluva speed to stir a pot noodle!

Sent from my X17 using Tapatalk

[Conor]

Talking on a mobile phone does not increase the number of accidents. Its been debunked the same as exceeding the speed limit means you'll have a crash.

http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/ ... hones.aspx

I prefer to trust the science rather than emotive claptrap which seems to be what has steered the whole thing around mobile phones and speeding.

If using a mobile communications device was really that bad then there would not be an exemption for 2 way radio and the police would not be being filmed countless times on TV shows when single crewed using their radio/phone during a high speed pursuit.

[Captain Caveman 76]

Thing is, you can demand a bigger police presence to deal with people on phones but as soon as the cops do it, you get the usual whingers who focus on the revenue earned rather than the fact all those people got caught using their phones while driving.
Look at speeding blitzes. Its the usual story. They could catch 200 people speeding through a road in one day and rather than say "wow, glad they got dealt with. Maybe they'll slow down in future" you get the usual focusing on how much money is raised in fines. The cops are damned if they do and damned if they dont.
My solution would be an abolishing of the fine system and instead its an outright ban. Six months to begin with. Then a year for next offence. Then 18 months for the next one and if caught again they just remove the license and that person never gets to drive again. For this system to work howevr, they'd need to only apply it to vehicles that are actually moving. None of this "still in control" pish even though your in neutral with the hand brake on.

The fact that they catch so many people speeding proves that the traps aren't working as a deterrent.
Don't get me wrong, a speeding fine (and any other fine for that matter) is a voluntary tax, but if speeding or using the mobile is so dangerous,why isn't the onus on prevention rather than catching?

[Captain Caveman 76]

Talking on a mobile phone does not increase the number of accidents. Its been debunked the same as exceeding the speed limit means you'll have a crash.

http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/news/ ... hones.aspx

I prefer to trust the science rather than emotive claptrap which seems to be what has steered the whole thing around mobile phones and speeding.

If using a mobile communications device was really that bad then there would not be an exemption for 2 way radio and the police would not be being filmed countless times on TV shows when single crewed using their radio/phone during a high speed pursuit.

What about trusting the statistics?

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... sv/preview

Https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... sults-2014

Both show a year on year decline in the number of injuries and deaths, despite this "endemic" culture of phone use whilst driving and and increase in traffic on our excessively congested roads.

IMO it is simply down to people's inability to drive.