Dont Use Your Mobile Even When Stationary.
 

That's correct Gents
In this Nanny State we're now enduring, a friend of mine got a tap on his car window 2 weeks ago from a traffic Cop,......."are you using the phone Sir"
were the Officer's words.

John was stationary at the time, he had pulled over in a safe place to take a call from Primary School that his son had been taken ill & could he be collected.

Instant penalty & 3 points were the result of this.
The law is (& and has been for some time)
If you use your phone while the keys are in the ignition, it's an offence.

Funny isn't it why it's not an offence to target Smokers while driving because the Government would loose so much revenue.
It's also an offence to eat an apple or a Sandwich while at the wheel too!

I'm sure my blacked out rear window has saved me a few points, cos I don't consider myself a dangerous driver while eating an apple.
End of Rant for today.
Good evening

The law has, in essence, always implied that if you use any hand for anything other than driving, then an offence of "careless driving" is being committed. However (us) smokers tend to get away with it, unless you are caught in the act of lighting up as you are driving. Where they can obviously prove that your eyes are off the road to focus on the act of lighting... if you're moving....

Same as focussing on the ice cream heading for your mouth!! ;)

However the incident you report is a "Jobsworth" incident. And should be argued. Regardless of the reason why he was on the phone - if he was parked sensibly and anchors engaged, then in my mind he should not have been fined.! :mad: In fact he did the sensible thing......

Next, you'll be fined for taking your eyes off the road to look at your speedo, or checking your rear view mirror!

And don't even think about taking your hands off the wheel to activate your indicators (unless the car is absolutely stationary with the handbrake fully applied, and its up on bricks in a locked garage, with the keys hanging up in the kitchen cupboard) :p:

I'm glad I've got an auto, so they can't do me for gear changes :getmecoat:

Where will it all end :shrug:

What I'd like to do is sue the police forces that take part in these "reality tv" "cops" programmes etc - there they are racing around whilst speaking to camera and even looking at and gesticulating ... how is that in any way different? and whilst they are meant to be engaged in "high intensity" activities ...

What you describe Jules is really really silly an actually scares me - we really are becoming automatons ... we need a bit more backbone though I can't see the Spanish, etc sitting there and just taking this ... :(

Only ever use hands free and although in the event of a accident the phone records will be checked and if talking can be a contributory factor and you will get done.

All our Staff are advised when we call them etc, that if they have "parked up" for call that they completely remove the keys from ignition if using hand held.
This having been checked fully complies with the stupid rules.

Mind you nothing happens to most using hand held on the move by the number I see,
so perhaps being good and pulling up to prevent accidents is no longer the right way to go............

Common sense should be applied, and only pull up the reckless people talking and even texting, before an accident occurs.:(

As you may know, Magistrates have the power to issue a deprivation order for any motor vehicle used in crime.

Unfortunately (in my view), the order is not used enough. However, there are moves afoot within the Magistrates' Association to apply the order to those who have been caught more than once using a mobile in contravention of the legislation. The main stumbling block, of course, is that offenders have the opportunity to accept a fixed penalty ticket.

As far as Jules' original comment. Although within the letter of the law (knee-jerk legislation again), such an action was risible and does absolutely nothing to gain the confidence and cooperation of the public. Clearly the guy was perfectly safe in his actions and should have been applauded rather than castigated.

I recently had a police car behind me as I approached a set of traffic lights. The lights changed from green and I made sure that I stopped in time, however there was a screech of brakes as the police car made an emergecy stop to prevent a meeting of bumpers. I waited for the lights to change to green and as I pulled away the blue lights went on and the police car did a u turn and disappeared. I am positive that the driver was pre-occupied with a radio message that lead to his nearly rear shunting my car.

I wonder what the 2 officers in the car would have done if the situation had been reversed........

The law is a bit confusing here but- if the engine is off you should be ok.
If this occured and you were given an on the spot ticket- I would go to court- this is my opinion of course, as for silly penalties like this half the time evidence / forms are incomplete. The same could be said for fixed penalty speeding tickets, theres a 50/50 chance if you go to court due to some iregularity theres no case so many people could fight it but don't bother as they are afraid of losing their licence. And before the speeding bandwagon get on at me- I'm not talking silly speeding past a school for example

Right I've just spoken directly to the "Victim" in question because the original story was through another friend in the Motor Trade, so I wanted to hear it from the horses mouth.

All facts in post # No 1 are spot on.
The road in question was off a main highway on an industrial estate in Anglesey.

3 points £60 fine, because his keys were in the ignition with the engine running
"The driver is deemed not to be in full control of the Vehicle even if stationary"

John is Self Employed and has a Full hands free kit fitted, but on that one occasion, his headset did not connect, & there just happened to be an Unmarked Cop car behind him.
The North Wales Police were apparently short on "Target Points" that month, otherwise he may have just got off with a warning.

THIS INCIDENT NEEDS PUBLICISING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE (WITH YOUR HELP PLEASE) TO MAKE EVERY DRIVER IN BRITAIN AWARE OF THIS LAW.
LET'S PUT A STOP TO THE POOR MOTORIST GETTING RIPPED OFF.
TAKE IGNITION KEYS OUT WHEN USING PHONE OR EATING IN YOUR CAR
Please email to everyone you know.

I think we need to take it one step further and get this Law challenged because its a blatant money scam ................nothing to do with road safety.

I agree with Jules that it needs challenging, but because it is bad law. The typical knee-jerk, populist reaction of this meddling, sound-bite conscious administration.

I don't believe that it was designed to be money-grabbing, although when used in this context it would certainly seem to be a convenient side effect.

I cannot see what the problem is with speaking on the phone while stationary i dont know the full wording of the law but dont it say WHILST DRIVING ? so if i am standing still in reality i am moving, confusing ,as for driving and on the phone useing one hand is dangerous (as my nephew was knocked of his bike by a guy on the phone) and should carry a life ban in my view. but if you pull over and answerd the call then whats the problem. I think the most annoying part of the #1 post is when you see the offences the local police make, in my area i have seen the police on the phone, parked on yellows out side a icecream parlar sat in a van eating icecream, no seat belt etc .
And i will tell you a story a officer of the law told me.. i was on my way to the dentist with my son on a main rd i pressed the button on the lights to cross the rd as the dentists was opposite the lights, i turned to look to the left and a police car stoped to let me cross as i looked he had no seat belt on so i politly done the seatbelt motion with my hand and mouthed YOU HAVE NO BELT ON du with that he pulled in got out got right up to me about 3" from my face, but he felt rather small as im 6"5
and he was a small child, he went on whats your name BOY, dont have to tell you (THE LAW) as i was explaining the law to him about not wearing a seatbelt oh oh oh he said um im looking for someone and i dont have to weare one what utter NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-NAUGHTY WORD-, he did not know what to say as i caught him out ,so red faced he got in his car and went on his way . but the ironic part is the police station was 30 feet from the traffic lights where on other occations iv seen the same thing a traffic officer on the phone while at a junction waiting to pull out so there you have it
ONE LAW FOR THEM you know the rest

it says "whilst being in charge of a motor vehicle" which comes down to the engine being on.

Well it depends on the the way you interparate the wording of the law im sure if it ens up in court the judge will see the stupidity of the officer giving the ticket, and the pettyness of it im sure

For what its worth there is a notice up at work regarding ignition keys and phone calls and it goes something like this.............


As you all know most buses and a few coaches do not have ignition keys. When making a mobile call regardless of whether or not a key is in the ignition please make the call whilst out of the drivers seat with engine switched off.

Afraid not. It's an absolute offence :( The pettiness will be reflected in the sentence though.

the laws an *** for the minor bump i just had i have to pay £100 pound to go on an awareness course as if the stress of the bump wasent enough

Sorry, disagree, people have been prosecuted for drink driving when in their homes and the keys are within the property, therefore the law cannot be interpreted one way for drink driving and another for using a mobile.

I am sure Raistlin will advise if I am wrong.......

I worked in the P1 (Legal Services) of the RAF and I used to have numerous cases (charges) withdrawn due to improper interpretation of the law by NCOs and MOD Police.

It is a bit tough to be done for it on an industrial estate in Anglesey but I wish they would be consistent and book all the people that think answering a mobile phone call is a licence to pull over on a red route in the middle of London.

This morning I was going to work when after coming round a gentle bend in the road I was faced with an on coming loorry.. thankfully in it's correct lane. However there was a car just starting an obvious overtaking (the lorry) manouvere.... I flashed my lights (which were on) and realised the driver was of the persuasion "I've started, so I'll finish" mentality.

I had to brake hard, as the oncoming car just about made it back into the correct lane - with me practically stopped, I gave the Agincourt salute. Only to be given the horn from the "offending" car..... driven by an uniformed Police officer.....:mad::mad::mad::mad:

Respect ? .... Not! :getmecoat:

Plus side - if there is one, is that it is the first time time I've had a twinge of "road-rage" since I bought the car!! :D:D

So, let me get this straight. If I am parked in a motorway service area, engine off, but keys in the ignition because I want to listen to the radio and I take a phone call then I could be prosecuted.

What half-witted cretin thought that up?

I suppose I shouldn't be suprised in a country where the 3 most powerful men are non-drivers.

It seems crazy if you're parked up. The law going mad.:shrug:
A lesson for us all I guess.

As I've said before....

" The law is NOT an " small mule " - Its a Donkey Sanctuary!!" ;):D

I lost my respect a long time ago and was always taught to lead by example.

It isn't helped when as a layman I knew more about the legalities quoted than the person quoting them.

I'm with MN190. It's laws like this and the jobsworth target obsessed coppers who enforce them that made any respect I had for the Police evaporate.

Well just spoken to a Bobby who lives next door, and he "thinks" the engine has to be OFF

So maybe keys in the ignition may be OK.
He suggested this case should be challenged in Court.
(but he's not a Traffic Bobby so didn't really want to comment) but he was understanding that a lot of the population have indeed lost respect for the Police in recent years. Bit then it's the LAW makers we need to challenge not the Bobbies enforcing it.:shrug:

:wot: These days most of the law makers have lost common sense IMHO.

The law also specifically targets mobile phones. Us radio hams and indeed taxis are free to carry on using our fist mic free of fear of prosecution - EXCEPT... the risk of a careless driving charge if doing it whilst driving. But AFAIK, there hasn't been a single prosecution of a radio ham.

Anyway, I recall that someone got off a charge of using a mobile phone whilst parked with engine running as they said they were dictating notes for a meeting and were not making a call. Hmmm... not sure I'd try that one.

Anyway, tis a stupid law. Careless driving would suffice for anyone eating, drinking, texting, phoning whilst driving. When stationary and parked (handbrake etc) what is the harm?

Nik

Agreed, but unfortunately its the Police who are in the firing line and losing the respect and confidence of otherwise law-abiding citizens by even contemplating enforcing something as utterly assenine as this. Surely common sense shoulkd have prevailed; Oh yeah, I forgot this Copper had an arrest target to meet so he took the route of the easy pull.

Sadly, all this sort of stuff does is alienate the public even more.

There have been several in the Wolverhampton area this year alone. :)

I've just been offered tickets for a policeman's ball, turned it down when I found out it was a raffle..........:D:D

Over here even touching a mobile phone while the engine is running is an offence. So no excuses anyway.

Interesting, the RSGB even give legal guidance to keep in your glovebox to show to a cop if stopped. I hadn't checked for a while. Best get myself a headset :) not that I use it much these days...

Well what happend to the great in Great Britain or what ever they re-name it, all the copper had to say was, sir unfortunatly you cannot have the engine on while making a phone call. simple, if i had to carry every law this crackpot, parasitic, waste of space, goverment,i'll have to buy another ZT to put em in. hands up if you know all the laws :shrug:..............mmmmmmmmmm another ZT ?:D

Not prosecutions for having or using in isolation, rather, charges of careless driving aggravated by use of radio equipment.

Last one I dealt with, in August, the guy was scrabbling around and looking on his back seat for some code book or other whilst talking to a contact and drove into the back of a car stationary at traffic lights.

As to "legal guidance", if in the opinion of a Police officer, the driver's standard of driving fell below that expected of a reasonably competent driver, he or she would be reported for careless driving regardless of any aide memoire the driver might have and regardless of whether an accident occurred :)

Ah, yes, but................... They've done a specialist drivers' course...........

Where? at RADA? :shrug:

Good defence, the offence is using a mobile telephone, not a dictating machine, as a surveyor I often park up to make my notes with the engine running, especially now, might get frost bite if I didn't....:)

You need a Webasto Parking heater then like wot we've got:D
Seriously though I'm glad this thread has made you all aware of the crazy law & hopefully will have saved you some points & some dosh.

Now this last comment got "removed" last year........... wonder if it will now we all know what a silly Law this really is.


Let the Law see "as little as possible" going on inside your car would be my advice & get some Privacy Glass (especially the rear one)
Stay within the Law using your phone obviously & ensure the Tint level is within the Law too, but at least you can have privacy & keep the Law out of your face.

disclaimer- unless of course you are driving as this could lead to loss of steering

That can't be right or we'd all be guilty each time we had a drink in the house. Possibly if the keys are in your pocket, it could be argued you are still "in charge" of the vehicle.

Its the government that create all these stupid laws. The police are under pressure, again from the government for "performance indicators", so if low for that month will find an easy target.

How about, if we are not in our cars and see a cop not wearing his belt etc, get a pic of hi & the reg of the car on your mobile, and report him to his inspector?

Also we must be aware that if we get "an itch" when driving not to scratch it if there's a cop about. :D

Wonder what the Law is for Travel Home & Campervan owners?
Many must sleep in them after a few Jars?
Keys must be in the Van so the driver is in control of Vehicle:shrug:

Where will it all end?
KEEP PUBLICISING THIS THREAD TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW GENTS & DON'T GET DONE!!
Keep Fines & Points to a bare minimum.

Many years ago when proper "Car Phones" were the norm rather than mobiles. I remember several of my colleagues getting a ticking off for using them whilst driving; it occurred to me that they were all holding the receiver in their right hand so it was easily visible from outside the car.

I'm left handed, and I wonder how many lefties have been saved by holding the phone in their left hand where the headrest hides it from behind and it's not easily visible through the off-side window?

Mike, I've only just seen this :)

The comment you make above would only be valid in very specific circumstances, such as where the Police had reason to believe that the individual had been recently driving. For example, where they had followed a suspected drink driver and were not able to make a safe stop before the suspect parked and went indoors. and I suspect that the comment has been taken (not by yourself) out of context to suit a particular agenda.

The Police must have reason to believe that an offence has been committed and they would be required to justify that reason to their seniors, a Crown Prosecutor, and, ultimately, to a Court.

I have Police officers in my house on frequent occasions, sometimes in the early hours of the morning, when applying for warrants and although it would, on occasion, have been obvious that I'd had a drink, they would have no grounds to require a screening sample etc.

Further, you've met me on several occasions. Do you REALLY think that in the "real world", any prosecutor would dare to stand before my Bench and tell me that the defendant is charged as said, having been woken from sleep, on spec, and arrested for providing a positive screening sample whilst their car was parked in the garage / drive and the keys were found within the premises? :D

No, much as it is tempting to use as a comparison, in my view, any such comparison would be invalid :)

I concur with Paul.
Even in the older days,
we only went into house if the "suspect" had been followed and not stopped due to no safe place to pull over.
We would then go to house.
Other times are after a Hit and Run or any crime where person left the scene.
The bonnet would be checked on entrance also to make sure still hot (as per our rules)
and the "suspect" then asked to take Breathalyser.
If the suspect refused he would then be arrested and if found he was drinking the "minute" he walked into house this was also noted,
Breathalyzer done or arrested on refusal to supply specimen without the normal reasonable grounds,
when a blood sample would be taken instead at station,
and the Court would then decide,
but not a recommended way to try and get out of Drink Driving as the Courts would generally see this as a attempt to sway results.

That clears things up - thanks people

I got pulled by the feds for driving one handed he said I was "not in control of the vehiocle" I asked him how come and his reply was because I was driving one handed.To which I replied I passed my test driving one handed to which he just looked blank at me I had to explain that when I took my driving test you had to give hand signals for left ,right, straight on, and slowing down which meant driving with only one hand on the wheel.This is something they dont do nowadays on the test.

He could not reply to this and let me on my way:shrug:

Nice 1 No 6, must remember that one just in case.:D

I understand that can be very painful and may even make your eyes water :getmecoat:

:lol:It did at the time :confused:

while i dont agree with the nanny state, i do believ that doing any thing other than driving while driving is dangerous, from eating an apple to drinking a can of coke, i was a delivery driver for years so i know what the dangers are, its been a well know fact if you want to use your fone in a car, pull over and take your keys out, thats the law, ignorance is not an excuse, if i see some one on the fone i do shake my head at them, i think tho that a police man can exorsise common sense and i supect that copper was down of his targets for the day. i fully back the police when they book some one who is driving and using a phone, eating an apple etc, i dont play with the radio while driving, some think its daft, but i have been a victim of some one who was playing with a car radio while driving, they wrote my mk 2 granada off while doing this, ITS DANGEROUSE FOR PETES SAKE. use the force luke was a movie concept, not reality, how people can drive with out the eyes on the road i dont know, how many children have been killed cos the driver glanced away for a split second. my advice is. pullover. stop. take keys out. place on dash board. now make your call

Your comments duly noted baconbuttyman but the point of this thread is that this Law isn't a well known fact !!
99% of drivers I speak to, don,t know that the engine has to be OFF

And if someone can explain to me how injury will result by being stationary with the engine running :shrug:

There will be a law next about Farting while driving

If you'd ever been in a car with me you'd understand the wisdom of this idea :D :getmecoat:

Mutley ..................do something :panic:

Sorry Jules - serious subject I know.

...anyone hear the report on BBC TV Breakfast news that a Police Force, Traffic etc are booking motorists for smoking and charging them with driving without due care and attention or not in Control of Motor Vehicle?
Believe its either Devon or Cornwall, a area with no Motorways but many Accidents.
Also doing you eating, Changing Stations etc while driving where spotted.
Also more sensible, things like no seat belts, children not in correct child seat or fastened correctly, and using Mobile phones regardless of a hands free kit.
Everyone is getting a £60 or £80- fixed penalty ticket plus some additional 3 Points.

It is meant to cut down deaths on the Road by 2 a Year.
Could also be rolled out nationwide if effective enough!!

Here's an idea, why not stop everyone driving and then there would be no deaths caused by motor cars...........:getmecoat:

Do you know why John? REALLY why?

It's because this administration have now turned low level careless driving into another "nice little earner" by allowing the Police to issue fixed penalty tickets, thus circumventing the Courts.

This was against the advice of the MA and effectively allows a Police officer to decide whether an action amounts to careless driving or not, something which should be wholly within the remit of the Judiciary.

Nice little earner, certainly but it's going to drive an even bigger wedge between the Police and the public but also, now between the Police and the Judiciary.

Luckily, the Police haven't the option to charge an individual without the agreement of the CPS which is neatly circumvented by the issue of a fixed penalty ticket, which is neither a charge nor a fine but merely an offer to accept an arbitrary sum of money and points in lieu of same.

I don't agree with whining and trying the "pepipoo way" of getting out of FTPs as you know and would never dream of advising or suggesting a course of action to others but if I was pulled over and offered the FTP method of dealing with alleged careless driving, there is no way I would accept it, even if I thought it justified, for an incident of this nature.

I would, instead, insist upon being reported for Summons, and if the duty CPS prosecutor was facile enough to authorise a charge, would argue my case in Court.

Hi John,

For the record, it was Dorset. They have a Zero Tolerance level on these things.
Gawd Help Us All!! ;)

Quite agree Paul, and you know my thoughts on this.
It is so damaging to the Police Forces around the UK to.

All the drivers i worked with were aware of this as were the delivery drivers we had delivering to us, tbh even my wife knows this it the law, it was to stop people being tempted to drive on wards while saying tra etc

Apparently it's illegal to hold a conversation with your passenger in China.

How long before we all have to drive along in total silence in this country?

That would be a bleesing sometimes, when S.W.M.B.O is in the car too!! :D

I can't see Government outlawing smoking while driving.
Think of all that revenue they will lose!

Like I've said before every car we own is going to have Privacy glass from now on!............It will keep the nosey parkers out.

So.......... if it's "illegal" to use a hands free phone kit, change radio stations and maybe sing along to your favourite ditty, why does the Government allow these irresponsible car manufacturers etc to produce these items for free sale to the public.

Should they not tax your radio, hands free kit etc for a few years before banning them? :confused::getmecoat:

Illegal to smoke in a "business" vehicle already. And.... privacy on front windows is not allowed...... Too late Jules, they've already gone and done it. :mad:

Question... If I am travelling to (and from) work, does my private vehicle become a "business" vehicle? :shrug:

Hi Andrew I meant Legal Privacy glass.
That means as dark as possible within the Law.
I wouldn't risk getting a fine and 3 points!

Some Renaults have a pinky semi mirrored finish to the windscreens.
(obviously this is legal as it's OEM)
Wonder if any companies could replicate that finish, and keep the front looking nosey parkers out even more.

Seen those Renaults, know some friends who have them. They are always saying "I waved at you and you ignored me" My usual reply is "Did not see you, but as long as we missed each other, then we're all happy!" ;) :D

found this website and it says the engine should be switched off.

http://www.roadwise.co.uk/adults/usi...whilst-driving

I read the link and note it states "with the engine switched off" it does not say and the keys removed. If this is an official document then a copy carried in the car should cover the event if it happened to ourselves.


http://www.the75andztclub.co.uk/foru...5cd1aad19a.jpg

there will be jules ,and they will say it is a turbo

boost
:D

Coo, hope they don't ban sneezing ? .

If I get a fit of nose action it can go on for quite some while .. :D

so @ 70mph, 103fps, approx 1 sneeze every 10 seconds..

2 min sneeze fit = about 1 mile with my eyes shut !! :D:D :getmecoat:

Smokers are not getting away with it - in fact there is currently a group of Doctors trying to get Smoking in Cars banned, and so they should. I am a Smoker and do not smoke in my Car for many reasons - mostly my Kids health.

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.a...ntid=152729669

Tosh and piffle! :mad:

[quote=FredSpencer;493547]Tosh and piffle! :mad:[

I love smokers....they keep me gainfully employed!!!!!!!!! God I wish my daughter didn't smoke though, but at least she does it outside and never in the car! :shrug: ]

We keep a lot of people in jobs through our selfless sacrifice. Not to mention all the extra tax we pay so that others don't have to pay so much.

I'm not a smoker, but have no issue with others smoking - it's their choice

I guess this idea of banning smoking in cars is to make sure that those that don't have the choice (ie kids in cars) aren't forced to "indulge". But what if you smoke, it's your car and you don't have any kids? Why should you then be stopped from doing as you please in your own car?

Scary stuff, all this health and safety.

Can't believe they don't let me use a phone when the car is stationary in a layby, and yet I can fly an aircraft, in total darkness and in cloud, soley by reference to instruments, talk on a radio, write down clearances and change frequencies, all with passengers on board.

Getting to be an odd place to live the U.K. indeed.

I'm a smoker, I am alone in the car 99% of the time. And I smoke in my car, windows open. If I have non- smokers in the car, I do not smoke, although there might be some wayside stops on the way!! ;)

If they ban me from smoking in my own vehicle, in my own space, in my private vehicle, then that's the national meetings out of the window. Smoking is voluntary euthanasia, and I have the right to do so!! :mad:

The Government wants my tax £'s for my choice of smoking. They want me to stop and lose the revenue? Or do they want the revenue from fining people who smoke in their own cars instead? Or both? :confused: If they want to ban smoking, then they should do it, not piecemeal..... But if they do ban it, they would lose £m in revenue.....;)

Next they will ban smoking in your own house!! :shrug: Even if you live alone!! :shrug::shrug:

Rant over.... Time for the common sense people to rise and start "democracy" again... :p:

I know... common sense is not to smoke...... but see my earlier sentence ;):D

Now where is that wooden spoon?? ;);):D:D

Andrew, you'd better come over here and live in Spain. I'm sitting in a cafe at the moment and there are people smoking around me. :( Can't say that I'm too happy about it, being a non-smoker myself, but I think that I favour the freedom to do what you want more. After all I don't have to be in here, it is very well ventilated and I could go outside but there is no air-con out there.
No, we are going too far in the UK.

Oh! And about the voluntary euthanasia bit: my Grandfather smoked 60 a day from the age of 15 till he died at 92. I wonder what age he would have made had he not smoked? There's no logic in it.

With regards to being reported for driving without due care due for smoking, I would certainly say this is fair enough if it has been a contributory factor in an accident or near-miss, such as looking out side window and said cigarette.
To get reported for just smoking whilst driving is in my opinion excessive.

With regards the original phone incident, yes it seems the police officer was over zealous in the extreme, but..........

(I might give away my job here!!)

Bearing in mind the huge number of police officers in this country there are bound to be some who are officious, arrogant, rude etc etc. Unfortunately it is these officers that usually get talked about.

As old bill the most powerful tool we have is discretion. As other posts state we make mistakes too and I will always lean on the side of discretion if I believe someone has made a genuine mistake rather than attempt a dangerous manouver.

Also please consider that the officer in question may have just come from, or recently dealt with a fatal involving a driver using a mobile.

Anybody who blatantly uses a mobile phone whilst (actually) driving or speeds excessively - I offer you the "opportunity" of coming out with me when I have the misfortune of dealing with a fatal, and more importantly completing the worst task of my job, the knock on the door.
I remember every one like it was yesterday.

Please note my rant is not aimed at anyone in particular, but I do feel the need to stick up for Traffic Officers as a whole.

We are not there to raise monies for the government etc etc - we apply the Law in the way they allow us to and hopefully let the Law abiding citizen enjoy his use of the road.

When you can find one.

Fair point ...... re-word to "the ones who break the least Laws!!!" :shrug:

Ha,

Possibly ambiguous. I refer, not to the citizen of course but to the traffic officer :getmecoat:

Ooops - ok :)


As I'm sure you are aware, I have the talent of "never being there when you want one" and also being able to be behind many people the very first time they ever flaunt the Law!!

Accidental double post.

Mods please delete

My ambiguity I think rather than your interpretation:getmecoat:

It's good that you can laugh at yourself :)

To make it perfectly clear, my point was not made against traffic officers, rather against the financially motivated priorities foisted upon us by the previous administration where you had a ratio of one Policeman to 150 million scameras. :)

:shrug: im confused reading this

I personally (along with plenty of coppers) also hate speed cameras. The ones at accident hotspots, which is how they were first initiated, are ok.

The problem is they cannot allow discretion. There is not many police officers that would give you a ticket for say 37 mph at 4am in the morning. With a camera you get a ticket.

In my opinion not proportional.....

It's fair to say that scameras don't catch the drunk drivers, DWDs, dangerous drivers either.

Given the choice of your hypothetical speeder or the anti social barsteward who drives with a blood alcohol level multiple times over the limit, I know whom I'd rather see brought to justice.

It's to be hoped that the present administration do a root and branch rethink.

The refusal to fund local authority scameras is a positive start though :)

It's a shame the money raised by the cameras isn't used to increase the number of traffic police instead of replacing them. That would help to address issues like those above and more besides.

My personal opinion is that the Police force is like most big companies. There are to many chiefs and not enough indians. The chiefs that run the companies get silly money whilst the indians (the proper workers) don't. Like the NHS. How many wards now have non medical managers running them earning again silly money whilst a Matron could do it for a fraction of the cost and more efficiently.
When I was working for Rover up untill it "closed" we had an exercise within the manaufacturing process to have every worker accessed to determine how much "Value Added Work" was within their job description. I forget what the % was made up to but the min was in the 90's and the max was just over a 100%. All worker took part and given extra work to boost their % up. Was'nt very popular as you can imagine. The track workers had to, the team leaders had to, the lower managers had to. Then the exercise suddenly stopped.Why? When it came to the middle managers it was established that they did not add ANY "Value Added Work" to the production of the vehicle. This is what is going on within these big companies today. Police, NHS etc. Even charities are getting in on the act. I saw an avert on TV the other day asking for a donation of £150 Yes £150 to pay for an operation on these poor kids with cleft palets. Question I ask myself is how much of that £150 goes for the operation and how much goes to the "Chiefs" wages.
Sorry I digress.
This police office who issued the fixed fine for the mobile phone insident. Could it be he was'nt sure of the law? Could it be he was told it was the law by his superior? This officer is like every other worker at the bottom of the ladder. He is the one who gets the brunt of it all. If the upper management did their job properly then there would'nt be any confusion. Upper management in this case being the government. If I asked my MP to ask the question in the house of commons would it happen? NOTHING. Why? We are the workers and upper management don't talk to workers directly unless it is for a publicity stunt and even then it's a fixed setup.
This is the end of my rant and I hope I unearthed a few questions some members could think about.

I've seen this type of thing a few times over the years, so if I have to call, I have the car stopped, keys out of the ignition, drivers door open and if it's not raining and safe I'll get out of the car. Otherwise, either I have it in car mode (android phone), or just switch if off altogether.

I suppose you could get away with it if you have one of the keyless drive Systems, may get away with it on the technicality.

Ill admit i must be one of the most dangerous drivers on the road for the amount of times i need to use my phone parked in a safe place with keys in the ignition. will probibly have to deal with North Wales police at some point too :(

I was involved in an incident when a group of kids ran across the road, most behind me and one into the side of me.
When giving a statement to our insurers, I mentioned that, as the group ran behind I checked my mirror to make sure they hadn't collided with the rear of my car. The insurance guy told me, "best not to mention that you weren't looking at the road""!. Now, I believed checking the mirrors was a part of driving correctly?

I recently went of the polices naughty boy course (34 in a 30) ! while there I learnt that, While talking holding a phone is illegal, .......

If you have an accident while using a totally hands free unit...... you are still prosecuted for using a phone while driving EXACTLY THE SAME AS IF YOU WERE HOLDING IT !!!!

The act changes the offence from careless driving into dangerous driving !!!

Why the hell are handsfree legal then ?????

Oh and sorry if this has been raised in the thread.....not read it all !!! ;)

thatll be 3 points on my lisense then. not good for a bus driver. i should know better driving for a living.

i was stopped in my car at a set of lights on red in nuneaton today and thought i could get away with it. just checked a txt message.

i was wrong :(

copper on foot saw me.

just need to wait for the letter now. stupid stupid stupid :mad:

That's sneaky, fancy letting a bobby out on the beat on foot ..... bet it never catches on. ;) :getmecoat:

I did a Driving Instructor course a few years ago and part of the course was 'talking' yourself down the road to become more aware of hazards. We were told in no uncertain terms to lock our mobiles in the boot and turned off if doing this as the Plod were quite happy to pull you for talking on a mobile. It happened to me; luckily I followed advice and the look on the Plod's face when I opened the boot and told him to take the phone out of my briefcase was a picture. He wasn't happy.....

" the Plod were quite happy to pull you for talking on a mobile "..

Is there a difference between this and talking to a passenger ? especially one in the back seat ? :confused:

Hi.
Its the same when CB was illegal, you could own one quite legally but it was illegal to use it.
Dont forget anything that has distracted you during the time you are driving and that distraction happened at the point of an accident you will be charged with dangerous driving.
The big problem today is employers are always in communication with you on the road, Where are you, how many jobs have you left, don't go there go somewhere else, or the wife could be having a rant at you on the phone, all this adds to frustration when driving, taking risks and ultimately stress and tiredness. No boss can force you to answer a call on the move and even hands free uses up your proper concentration when driving and that puts you in a situation of being less aware of what's going on around you.
Drivers that text on the move should be banned for at least 4 weeks as in my mind are even a greater hazard with their eyes off the road.

No call or text is that important, if it is stop and don't risk others lives or your own.

Google cars will have to pay too :)

what if you have keyless start?

Dont Use Your Mobile Even When Stationary.
 

There maybe a get out here used by a mate of mine successfully - This is the tale mate gets stopped on an industrial estate whilst on phone engine running handbrake on he had only just got in the car - Police car arrives pulls up mate continues to chat a grumpy copper taps on window mate finishes call informs copper he is rude as he was on the phone copper becomes red faced rants about use of mobile mate smiles :}copper rants more:devil::devil: and gets out ticket pad. Mate asks him is the road he is on adopted by the council and therefore under the jurisdiction road traffic act:shrug: Copper becomes very irate and reply's yes mate smiles lots:}:}:} and asks no very very irate copper:devil::devil::devil: to check his facts. Copper tells mate no need he knows his job Mate informs him you don't:duh::duh: I own this 5 acre estate and every building and road around it. All roads are maintained by my company as are the pavements and street lighting, that's why you just drove past a sign that clearly says private access unit owners customers and delivery's only :D:D:D:D:D:D:D. Copper gets on radio a fair distance from my mate comes back red faced and apologises - Mate informs him politely cos hes that kind of man no worries everyday is a school day:D:D:D:D - This is the truth so Jules you mate may want to see if the rd is adopted by the council if not boys in blue are going to be left flat footed unless of course the site owners supports their action

sorry I have not read every post but can you be nicked on a hands free then?

As far as I am aware, if the public have free access to a road, whether private or publicly owned the Road Traffic Acts apply. This also applies to pub/supermarket car parks etc unless access is controlled by a barrier or gate.

Been there with unadopted roads on an estate I lived on....

Stationary you turn the engine off unless held up in traffic. Yes I know lots of Bus Drivers sit with the motor going, see it every day but its an offence. So chummies first mistake was not turning of the engine. Still reckon he should have got a boll---g and advice but its a discretion thing. Chris.S.