st3v3

today i saw a youngster driving fiesta round a trafic island where his missus was holding his mobile phone to his ear.

Now, i understand he's using his phone, but he's technically got a hands free kit.

What you lot think illegal or not??

focusv8

I'd say busted;

How does the law apply?

While driving, you will be breaking the law if you pick up or use any type of phone that is, or must be, held to operate it. For example, this means you may not use your mobile phone:

• when you are stopped at traffic lights;
• when you are queuing in traffic;
• to make or receive calls, text messages or to access the Internet.

RichieST

iTrader: (2)

Nice loophole in the law

tabetha

I'd say plod would be hard pushed to make it to court, the reason why the act had to come in is because they were having trouble satisfying jp that the driver was not in control(of the car) using a mobile which is what they used to prosecute you for.
tabetha

Iain Mac

I'd say busted. The law doesn't say the driver has to hold the phone, just that it has to be held (by someone) to be used, and him trying to keep his ear in contact with the phone being held by her in a moving car is probably harder work than holding the damned thing himself.

scholesyy

lol i dunno but that made me laugh!

danneth

so surely that must mean no driver can talk while driving to anyone else in the car?

Iain Mac

What does? I don't follow the logic here - unless he wants to phone one of his passengers there's nothing to stop him chatting away with anyone else in the car.

danneth

thats my point, if someone else is holding the phone for him whats the difference between chatting to someone on the phone or chatting to someone in the back seat?

Dicko&Vacant

iTrader: (3)

reading the above- it doesnt make it particularly clear- as technically if you had your phone on loudspeaker- you dont have to hold it to use it, especially if using voice activated dialling

Sarah

Iain Mac

It's not the talking that's illegal it's the use of a hand-held phone.

I don't know if they wrote the law to not specify WHO was holding the phone or if that is a happy accident for the authorities but I'd say he could be done for this idea of using the phone while it is held by someone else.

And if the phone is on loudspeaker with voice-activated dialling you don't have to hold the phone to use it so there's nothing illegal there.

zetec-Sam

iTrader: (2)

Who cares, every cunt has ignored the bloody ban on phones anyway!

Isaac.Hunt

More absolutely atrocious 'reckon' of the law. The police do not prosecute anyway, so they never ''make it to court'' regardless.

The offence is that it is illegal to ride a motorbike or drive a car while you are using a hand held communication device.

The purpose of the legislation is to cover the handling of a mobile phone (or similar) which has been linked, as everyone will know, to an increased risk of road accidents. Your hands are busy fiddling with a phone, not looking at the road, looking down or trying to find contact details etc.

The law allows for hands free phones and even phones in a cradle attached to your dashboard. You are allowed to push buttons, but not to hold the phone, the same as with the radio.

Similarly, I personally would argue that a hand held communication device supported by a hand not belonging to the driver is, as such, not a hand held communications device at the time of it's use. It is the same as a bluetooth headset or a phone in a dashboard cradle for the purposes of this offence.

The one caveat is that you can still be prosecuted for not having proper control of your vehicle even with a hands free phone if you are stopped for driving in a poor or careless manner. The same £60.00 fine and 3 points penalty applies to both offences.

tabetha

You are entitled to your opinion, as others are ISAAC.
It is the police that put forward the "case" for consideration of prosecution, most people would regard that as the police prosecuting, as without the plod involvement in this case no action would be taken, and not particularly well either AOJ/plod my case cost the taxpayer £30,000 and had more holes in it than a culander, maybe the reason the crown court judge threw it out, BEFORE any one person myself apart was called.
But good point mentioned so few people take any notice, I always wondered about using a toy phone, as you can't communicate.
tabetha

Benni

What if I selotape my phone to the side of my face?

Benni.

H7 CYA

iTrader: (3)

TIFF

He is just basically talking to someone.....

Wont get ddone for that

rich2302

Lacky band would be better, and if on auto answer, is no different to a bluetooth device!

Rsmat

iTrader: (2)

id say he should get away with it.

cozmeister

iTrader: (1)

Pics or it didn't happen.

By the sound of it he should be boned by the law, because we all know that if it were any of us caught doing the same thing, we'd instantly get the points and the fine.

DanW@FastFord

iTrader: (1)

Nonsense. You are not allowed to hold a 'hand held device'. There's nothing in the law whatsoever about someone else holding it.

Chip

iTrader: (3)

It doesnt have to be held by you to operate it if your passenger is holding it for you.

Interesting situation, I would have thought that the guy should be getting off really, as I see no significant difference between having a passenger hold the phone and using any other type of hands free phone, he's still got both hands free for the wheel after all.

Chip

iTrader: (3)

The law doesnt say "by someone", so if you are going to use the logic that its illegal cause the phone is held by anyone other than the driver, then why not say the same about anything too not just anyone, seeing as neither is mentioned explicitly, so surely the phone is held when its in a holder mounted on the dash too if you want to take held as being the issue rather than who is holding it?

cozmeister

iTrader: (1)

It doesn't matter who's holding it.

Mobile phones need to be in a secure and fixed, purpose built holder if the driver intends on using it while driving. That includes poking the buttons and shouting at it...If it's anywhere else and the driver's caught either playing with it or talking into it, it's time to dig out the paper part of your license and pack it off to Swansea.

You'll get slapped by the law if you're caught because you're deemed as not being in control of your vehicle. The whole point is that you're not paying full attention to driving while you're chatting about the footie to Billy-bob on the phone.

DanW@FastFord

iTrader: (1)

Which is utterly ridiculous. It's lawful to chat in the car, and it's lawful to drive with one hand on the steering wheel - but add a phone into the mix and it suddenly becomes illegal.

Some people can't walk and eat at the same time, and in the same way some people can't use their mobile and drive at the same time - so everyone gets penalised because of the mongs who can't multi task

TOMMY_RS

god knows if its illegal, but it made me laugh

cozmeister

iTrader: (1)

Indeed...watching someone fumble around trying to light a fag one-handed at 80 is frankly more disturbing than seeing an overpaid sales rep negotiating his next payrise.

H3lsing

He should have done this....

BRAMMER

iTrader: (23)

So if someone in the car puts the phone on loud speaker you are not allowed by law to talk?

I could never understand the laws around this, if you have your phone mounted and on auto answer you can't talk - effectively hands free but if you have one of those bluetooth pieces don't you have to press something to answer?? taking your hands off the wheel?

I may be completely wrong but it all seems like a bunch of laws not really thought of

cozmeister

iTrader: (1)

With a headset, most phones are set to auto answer, or answer when you press the button on the headset.

As long as it's firmly mounted in a purpose-built holder, attached to the car (not your head ) it's fine. Poking the buttons on the phone while its in the holder, is also fine. Using it while it's not in the holder is what's illegal, so strictly, if a passenger's phone is on loudspeaker, the driver should keep quiet and concentrate on driving.

Sums up the last government nicely.

matts zetec s tdci

has no1 ever dun this then must just be me lol

cossiejay

to true and it pisses me right off i think a 3 month ban would work better then 3 points

Isaac.Hunt

The law really isn't something where ''reckon'' suffices, which is why we have legislation. God knows how somebody centuries ago predicted that the pitfalls of not writing legislation down would include people ''reckoning'' away outside the meaning of the acts on forums.

I find it bordering on the offensive that you would endeavour to push ''opinion'', including on threads where people are asking advice.

I remember one thread where you advised someone to obtain a garnishee order, something which would be impossible to say the least as these orders no longer even exist . You failed to respond then when I pointed out that the form taken now is that of a third party debt order.

I also cannot understand why your defence to being wrong is that ''most people would regard that as the police prosecuting''. Most people can't tell their arse from their elbow but it doesn't mean they should be accepted as being sufficiently informed on the subject of human anatomy. The police gather evidence for the CPS, the CPS often do not follow the decisions of the police on what they may ''reckon'' warrants prosecution or not, dependant on the facts.

I would worry about some people managing to turn their engine on and take the handbrake off, let alone managing to use their neanderthal fists to actually call anyone.

Jesus wept.