# Using A Mobile Phone While Driving - Penalties Enough?



## Bristle Hound (May 31, 2009)

As I see way too many people not only talking on a mobile phone while driving but texting while driving, just wondering what everyones thoughts were on the penalties if you get caught?

Me? I think if you get caught speaking on a mobile phone while driving then it should be 6 penalty points & a £500 fine

If you get caught texting, then an automatic 1 month ban and a £500 fine

In each case the Police should be allowed to seize the phone as evidence until the case goes to Court

Sorry folks there is absolutely NO EXCUSE to drive and speak on / text on a mobile phone

Thoughts?


----------



## PugIain (Jun 28, 2006)

I agree. If you want to talk, pull over in a SAFE place. Not just plonk up the curb and inconvenience other people.


----------



## Kiashuma (May 4, 2011)

Totally agree but don't think it will ever happen, can always hope.

I see so many people on the phone or texting, there needs to be a harsh penalty to deter folk from doing it.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

The current deterants are obviously not enough as loads of folk still do it. 

I even see lots of people using the phone in hand when the car has bluetooth.


----------



## Bartl (Apr 3, 2013)

I thing you should get a six month ban if you get caught. May seem a bit harsh but think about all the people that get killed because of people useing phones while driving.


----------



## DMH-01 (Mar 29, 2011)

Most of the time points don't put people off committing/recommitting an offense.

Automatic bans would be more effective IMO.


----------



## Vossman (Aug 5, 2010)

The penalties if you are caught driving a truck while on the phone are different, you will go to court and could possibly loose LGV entitlement. Min £200 fine - friend of mine found out the hard way just last year, magistrate only imposed 3 points and £200 fine but the traffic commissioner further suspended his truck licence for two weeks. He nearly lost his job as a result.
So many people use the phone now whilst driving, worst offenders seem to be taxi drivers around here, there isn't a real way of policing this law, its only if a copper just happens to see you will you get done.
Would making the punishment harsher work? I don't know, lets face face it 6 points for no insurance doesn't work either.


----------



## Naddy37 (Oct 27, 2005)

IMHO, it should be an instant one month ban. Get caught again, six month ban, or even crush the vehicle. 

If they moan that they'll loose their job, up it to a 12 month ban, as you'll just know they wouldn't of learnt their lesson.

Get caught, learn the hard way.


----------



## DJ X-Ray (Sep 2, 2012)

Instant ban


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

It's funny you should bring this topic up as I just overtook a chap who was driving a Bentley Continental GT Super Sport who was on his phone. Obviously he thinks he hasn't got allot to lose.


----------



## steve204me (Jul 19, 2013)

I agree that the penalties should be harsher, but the main problem, to my mind, is that offenders know that the chances of being caught are fairly low.

Another ( almost ) unenforcable law.


Steve.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

None otherwise I won't be able to use my phone  




Just a joke people, my GF answers if im with her if not il pull over


----------



## R7KY D (Feb 16, 2010)

1 month ban , 6 points After you've been to court and also had to pay the costs 

So when you comes to get insurance the insurance company know what a liability you really are , no point with a fine the implications of a ban and points will have more financial impact on the individual . and rightly so


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

Needs harsher penalties I think. Maybe escalating to a ban or car taken away after 3rd conviction. Have to admit it I am one who if phone rings will look for a layby/side street to pull in but will answer as I'm driving once I see somewhere. I also text on my workphone which is the very old Nokia style so I can text with one hand(can't on my s2 as need both hands). Not trying to justify it there as I know it's wrong and if penalties were harsher I would stop immediately.


----------



## Bradders (Mar 2, 2013)

I was sat in traffic earlier on the A2 near Blackwall tunnel and nearly everyone sat around me was on the phone or texting! When they see a police car they drop the phone. Like what's been said driving ban and at least six points!!


----------



## Kriminal (Jan 11, 2007)

R7KY D said:


> 1 month ban , 6 points After you've been to court and also had to pay the costs
> 
> So when you comes to get insurance the insurance company know what a liability you really are , no point with a fine the implications of a ban and points will have more financial impact on the individual . and rightly so


^ I like this one. :thumb:

If my phone rings when I'm driving, it's quite simple.....I let it ring. If the call's important, the caller will leave a message for when I park up at my destination.

People driving around me with one eye on the road (if you're lucky) and the other looking at the phone that they're texting on scares me to death.


----------



## davo3587 (May 9, 2012)

A 1 month ban plus 6 points and a trip to the local morgue to see the victims who have died at the hands of these mindless t**ts, women children etc.


----------



## andy monty (Dec 29, 2007)

the  that hit my mother and sister on a zebra crossing got.. having failed to do the driver improvement course having admitted to not seeing 4 people on a well lit zebra {where the car coming the other way had already stopped}.... in the allotted time scale which was a full day +£150 fee

went to court....
and got..

£100 fine..

£40 costs

£20 victim surcharge...

And 4 Points



ps and mum or sister still havent seen the £20...... :tumbleweed:

pps having chased the car down the road and managed to contain my rage [just] at the time he "got out the car" i really do wish i had done to him what my mind was me screaming to do to him.... but somehow i thought he would be dealt with by this "wonderful" thing we call law...... Bet i would have got a bigger fine for Tango Whisky Alpha Tango'ing him............


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

The other thing that is getting more and more common is people driving with earphones in.


----------



## davo3587 (May 9, 2012)

Where family is concerned, If it was my mother and sister or anyone, then I will act as judge and executioner and give him the right punishment and deal with what after affects occur. Our judicial system is a joke, that's why I'd deal with it myself. 
It's not the legal way, but when the legal system fails you what do you do.


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

andy monty said:


> the  that hit my mother and sister on a zebra crossing got.. having failed to do the driver improvement course having admitted to not seeing 4 people on a well lit zebra {where the car coming the other way had already stopped}.... in the allotted time scale which was a full day +£150 fee
> 
> went to court....
> and got..
> ...


Aye, tis a ridiculous "justice" system we have

And yet when I posted up footage of a moped going through a red light on a pedestrian crossing, people were making out that it wasn't a big deal


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

Paintmaster1982 said:


> It's funny you should bring this topic up as I just overtook a chap who was driving a Bentley Continental GT Super Sport who was on his phone. Obviously he thinks he hasn't got allot to lose.


Strangely, I see a lot of this, and it's usually expensive motors being driven, and what gets me is that these people can afford £40K+ cars but not a hands free kit


----------



## SadlyDistracted (Jan 18, 2013)

Tis a sad state of affairs where there is a legal 'system' but no justice system.

However for motoring I think blanket penalties are'nt much use, and when they are not policed they become dis respected/regarded. Things should be based on culpability, not the 'thought' police. E.g. drink driving, so what if someone has 4 pints...
He/she drives home, but some usless person drives on the wrong side of the road... no lights on... and hits the person whos had 4 pints, who's 'guilty'?

Someone paying excellent attention doing 35 in a 30, or some mum doing 29, staring at the kids in the back, not paying attention to what she should be.... 
Who's the cause of the problem.

Sure if the 4 pinter is involved in an accident that is their fault, lock them up, but if their cognitive and reactive ability, even after the 4 pints is better than a gerriatric's when sober, who should not be on the road...?


Personally, basic driving test passed =provisional status... then max 2 years later advanced driving test... 
If anyone is caught not driving as per highway code, then it should be 2 stikes and out. e.g. failing to indicate, first time a 'reminder' warning, 2nd time, in say 2 years, large fine and retest... because either they are too lazy to drive properly (so should be peanalised and arguably not let on the roads) or they've become incapable of driving to the standards of the test--- ergo they shouldn't be on the road anyway....!

Then things like inconsiderate/driving without due care etc. (including parking close to bends, junctions, on pavements etc), incorrect positioning, middle lane hogs, roundabout lane discipline, ass*oles incorrectly using 'fog lights' etc. should be just that, inconsiderate, without duecare, 'dangerous, drivers and penalised accordingly after all there is a social and moral duty in driving ... stiff penalty, %pay based, so that overpaid ******s (wags, footballers, MPs, CEO's etc.) are proportionately fined (fining someone on minimum wage £100, is not the same a fining a footballer £100 is it !)

Oh and as to talking on a phone, what about talking to passengers, fiddling with the radio, sat nav, reading directions, lighting a *** etc....

Isn't the only totally safe driving .... to not drive at all ? Driving 1 to 2 tons of metal is always going to have its risks to others.


Discussion commence........


----------



## carl robson (Nov 16, 2011)

My thoughts on this is an unlimited fine banned for a year and the car cubed oh and you have to watch it cubed as well there is no call that can wait pull over and ring back!!.


----------



## uruk hai (Apr 5, 2009)

andy monty said:


> the  that hit my mother and sister on a zebra crossing got.. having failed to do the driver improvement course having admitted to not seeing 4 people on a well lit zebra {where the car coming the other way had already stopped}.... in the allotted time scale which was a full day +£150 fee
> 
> went to court....
> and got..
> ...


Your Mum and Sister won't see the £20, it's a victim surcharge and not compensation, the surcharge is applied to every one who is either found or pleads guilty.

I agree with the general feeling in the thread though, if it were up to me I would have a fine and points (£250 and six points to start) and on any subsequent offence the penalty would at least double. The other thing that should happen is that when someone drives while disqualified they should be sent down for the entire length of the ban (even if there is only a day left of the ban) and once released from prison they must serve the original ban again.


----------



## robertdon777 (Nov 3, 2005)

What I don't understand is people in big posh cars, range rovers, BMWs, Audi's etc. using mobile's.... You've spent a fortune on 4 wheels and can't afford Bluetooth? Stretched yourself so far to impress others that you can't afford the extra few quid for a simple piece of technology?


----------



## MEH4N (Mar 15, 2012)

robertdon777 said:


> What I don't understand is people in big posh cars, range rovers, BMWs, Audi's etc. using mobile's.... You've spent a fortune on 4 wheels and can't afford Bluetooth? Stretched yourself so far to impress others that you can't afford the extra few quid for a simple piece of technology?


I think the same. I see way too many people on the phone, i dont get the urgency to be on the phone all the time.


----------



## bidderman1969 (Oct 20, 2006)

bidderman1969 said:


> strangely, i see a lot of this, and it's usually expensive motors being driven, and what gets me is that these people can afford £40k+ cars but not a hands free kit





robertdon777 said:


> what i don't understand is people in big posh cars, range rovers, bmws, audi's etc. Using mobile's.... You've spent a fortune on 4 wheels and can't afford bluetooth? Stretched yourself so far to impress others that you can't afford the extra few quid for a simple piece of technology?


----------



## SadlyDistracted (Jan 18, 2013)

MEH4N said:


> I think the same. I see way too many people on the phone, i dont get the urgency to be on the phone all the time.


Good point, didn't we all get by ok before mobiles? Simple solution, how about all cars being fitted with mobile phone jammers :lol: Of course that wont stop people playing pokemon on them 

Hmm, yes, my car has excellent hands free built in (when I remember to turn on bluetooth on the phone)!

But lets face it mobile use in a vehicle (lorries included) is only a micro facet of the general bad driving, it all falls under driving without due care, consideration for others or dangerously, for what is already in place in the legal system, just back to lousy policing of bad driving in general :-(

Lets see, we can't use a phone when driving, or eat a kitcat, but you can light up a ***, apply your lipstick, fiddle with sat nav etc. 'legally' :speechles:wall::tumbleweed: f***ing madness!

As for the current fine structure, like most things here , totaly misrepresentative, do you really think that the cost of £40 isthe true cost to drag someone from being stopped through to the end of the court process! We get tied up in fragmented irrellavent and inconsistent micro detail and loose focus on the principle!

All these things are in place, at great cost to us all, and then just not applied at all well or effectively enough. Judge Dredd or the court of 'human rights' (I think there should be a court of 'human responsibilities')!

Where will it end, little black boxes and cameras 'watching'/spying on us in our transport, back to the thought police - penalised before any actual event? Or something actually based on consequence with fitting puishment?


----------



## andy monty (Dec 29, 2007)

uruk hai said:


> Your Mum and Sister won't see the £20, it's a victim surcharge and not compensation, the surcharge is applied to every one who is either found or pleads guilty.


oh i know that  was my poor attempt of sarcasm to the system :tumbleweed: :thumb:


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

There needs to be a penalty tariff which is high/severe enough to make people take notice.

What annoys me even more is the huge number of drivers you see using phones in cars which almost certainly have Bluetooth fitted. Even for those which don't have Bluetooth, buying a "hands-free" kit (often available for a couple of quid from Aldi/Lidl) or using the headset which usually comes with the phone is simple.

An acquaintance of mine was involved in a shunt in heavy traffic on the M1 recently while (on her own admission) using her phone. She had Bluetooth in her Missan Micrap and couldn't be bothered to set it up. The car was written off, I hope she's learnt her lesson but I wouldn't put money on it - silly cow. She now has another Micrap, wonder if she's read the manual yet?


----------



## Z4-35i (Jun 12, 2012)

Without a significant deterrent and proper enforcement, you unfortunately won't change peoples behavior.

I had an HGV come towards me last week, one of the ones that carry the large shipping containers, it had just come around the corner of a bend on a reasonable narrow B road and kicked up loads of dust as it veered onto the verge. I slowed down and gave it loads of room as he came past as he was going well over the 30mph limit, when he went past me I could see he was on his mobile.

Maybe loosing his license and his job would be more of a deterrent.


----------



## Kriminal (Jan 11, 2007)

DW58 said:


> There needs to be a penalty tariff which is high/severe enough to make people take notice.


^ but ain't the general problem as a whole with our system? People over here just get slapped wrists and let off with a warning.....

...you're completely right, and things like this, which are all too common nowadays, need to be clamped down on with BIG fines, and severe penalties.

I had another moron in front of me Today - I could tell what he was doing, whilst sitting in traffic, as he was looking down at his lap and texting...

...well, either that, or his missus was there! <gulp spit>


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

The problem goes far deeper for me.

on the one hand 'Joe public' will bay for blood when something bad happens, EG Driver kills a pedestrian, driver was on their phone, not using hands free kit

So there is public outcry over lienient sentencing and penalties, where were the police, why isn't the government doing something about it, blah, blah, blah....

But on the other hand tell everyone that their taxes will go up to pay for extra policing to catch people committing motoring offences or anything else, 'Joe public' will also be outraged as the thought of paying for it. it'll be outrage at paying more..............

We have now become so reliant on road cameras to police speeding, that the likelihood of being pulled over by a copper for anything is rather remote, so we're passing laws that are more or less un-enforceable.

10 years, or 5 years ago someone driving with a defective light would get pulled over. more often than not, they find something worse, like defective tyres......

I now see loads of cars driving about with brake lights out, headlights out, indicators not working properly, but we've suffered so much cuts to public sector budgets, there is not enough police out there to pull these people over and have a word.

If the police don't have the resources to pull over the idiots driving round in poorly maintained cars, there's no chance of them pulling people over for using their phone.

There is nothing wrong with using a proper hands free kit of course, but it does boil my p1$$ seeing someone holding their phone to their ear with one hand and trying to indicate/steer/change gear with the other


----------



## Warriors2013 (Aug 10, 2013)

I followed a young lad in his liveried works van last week for about half a mile while he was on his phone. He was laughing and joking with whoever he was talking to and steering/indicating/changing gear with his other hand. I could see the phone clearly in his hand - a white samsung Galaxy. We stopped at a set of lights and I clearly saw him look at me in his rear view mirror and he still carried on talking. "Nothing unusual in this" I hear you say "I see that all the time" you say, so what? 

I was driving a liveried Police van at the time! Did he get pulled over? Oh yes. But it doesn't end there.

He then had the cheek to deny he even had a phone on him, let alone that he was using it!

Fine and points issued! Checks confirm he already had 3 points for the same offence, so he obviously wasn't taking notice of his past errors. He then started whinging that he was going to loose his job if he got the points - guess what, tough luck! It's not a new law and everyone knows about it. There is no excuse these days but people still do it on a very regular basis.

£100 for a fitted blutooth kit or £100 fine & 3 points? No brainier really.


----------



## DW58 (Nov 27, 2010)

Well done officer - shame more of your colleagues don't do likewise.



Warriors2013 said:


> I followed a young lad in his liveried works van last week for about half a mile while he was on his phone. He was laughing and joking with whoever he was talking to and steering/indicating/changing gear with his other hand. I could see the phone clearly in his hand - a white samsung Galaxy. We stopped at a set of lights and I clearly saw him look at me in his rear view mirror and he still carried on talking. "Nothing unusual in this" I hear you say "I see that all the time" you say, so what?
> 
> I was driving a liveried Police van at the time! Did he get pulled over? Oh yes. But it doesn't end there.
> 
> ...


I find it amazing that so few people use their built-in Bluetooth sets, or buy add-ons. Aldi/Lidl often have Bluetooth sets for around £20-25 or thereabouts.

If penalties were higher and the tariff warded six point per offence, the Chav you mentioned above would be a lot poorer and walking by now.


----------



## DMH-01 (Mar 29, 2011)

Andyg_TSi said:


> We have now become so reliant on road cameras to police speeding, *that the likelihood of being pulled over by a copper for anything is rather remote*, so we're passing laws that are more or less un-enforceable.


I wish that was the case around here, I dread to think how many times this year I've been pulled over


----------



## Kiashuma (May 4, 2011)

Speak of this, just saw some clown when i was walking to the post office, head down texting in a traffic jam, just missed running into the car in front by a few inches. These morons need dealt with!


----------



## puckacostello (Apr 1, 2010)

I thin people should loose their licence on the spot! 

I don't get road rage but when I see someone on their phones I go mad!!


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

DMH-01 said:


> I wish that was the case around here, I dread to think how many times this year I've been pulled over


Why is that, is there something about your car that makes it 'of interest' to the plod?


----------



## SadlyDistracted (Jan 18, 2013)

Warriors2013 said:


> I followed a young lad in his liveried works van last week for about half a mile while he was on his phone. He was laughing and joking with whoever he was talking to and steering/indicating/changing gear with his other hand. I could see the phone clearly in his hand - a white samsung Galaxy. We stopped at a set of lights and I clearly saw him look at me in his rear view mirror and he still carried on talking. "Nothing unusual in this" I hear you say "I see that all the time" you say, so what?
> 
> I was driving a liveried Police van at the time! Did he get pulled over? Oh yes. But it doesn't end there.
> 
> ...


Fair enough, but on general diriving, how many vehicles parked on bends, pavements, within 10m of a junction, failing to indicate, foglights on/off appropriately have not bothered to adress?

And as for the deterent, :speechles smothing that would hit all drivers would be having to be retested to be able to continue driving, rather than just fined/points, that way there is no 'fine' inequality and it would go some way into (re)educating drivers. And lets face it if you cant drive to the standard of the basic test - you shouldn't be on the roads should you???


----------



## andystevens (Dec 12, 2011)

Paintmaster1982 said:


> It's funny you should bring this topic up as I just overtook a chap who was driving a Bentley Continental GT Super Sport who was on his phone. Obviously he thinks he hasn't got allot to lose.


And probably too lazy to pair it to the bluetooth. That is one thing I can't understand as many new cars have bluetooth as standard or even an inexpensive option but don't use it or opt it.

Certainly a 3 Month ban for 1st offence + a fine then after minimum 12 months or 6 months jail!
Makes me very angry when I see this.


----------



## Rob_Quads (Jul 17, 2006)

I do agree that the penalties are meaning people are still doing with not much car.

What I don't get is when I see the tv shows where people get caught - they have 9 points already and they pleed to let them off with a warning because they will loose their job.

If you driving is crucial to your keeping your job then YOU need to act accordingly. If you don't TOUGH.


----------



## DMH-01 (Mar 29, 2011)

Andyg_TSi said:


> Why is that, is there something about your car that makes it 'of interest' to the plod?


No real reason, more than likely the fact it's a young guy driving a nice car.


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

I think my kids in the back of the car are more of a distarction than me being on the phone, i spend half the journey looking backwards:wall:


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

DMH-01 said:


> No real reason, more than likely the fact it's a young guy driving a nice car.


Ahh, I see. They see a relatively young man in a nice high end motor and get suspect. I can understand that in a way, probably jealous.


----------



## Darlofan (Nov 24, 2010)

Andyg_TSi said:


> Ahh, I see. They see a relatively young man in a nice high end motor and get suspect. I can understand that in a way, probably jealous.


Or they may be thinking 99% of young people can't afford a car like that so we'll stop it and check.


----------



## andy monty (Dec 29, 2007)

first phone offence the usual fines and points and seize the phone for a one week minimum period returnable once the fine is paid in full....


repeat offence issue officer with tin snips and a lump hammer... cut sim card in 1/2 and hit phone repeatedly with lump hammer ( add more points and bigger fine based on cost of their phone...) £100 + say new £500 i phone... £600 fine....


----------



## ianrobbo1 (Feb 13, 2007)

Enjoyed myself at 5am this morning driving into Huddersfield, I pulled up at some lights in the pitch black of a wet and horrid morning, 
a "lad" pulls up beside me, I can see him clearly from the light of his phone, the lights change, and I was just about set off, when BANG!! :doublesho from the side, looks right to see "laddo" and his car flying forward about ten foot, and another car, with a LOT crumpled front end, now in "laddo" 1's place next to me, driven by another "lad", yes, same reason I could tell the first was a lad, the second also had his phone shining in his face!! wonder why he didn't see "laddo" 1 sitting at the now green light!! 

Neither car was drivable, I left, cheered no end,

also when I'm riding my bike I would say as many as 1 in 5 cars I pass in traffic are driven by someone on the phone, the laws we have are sufficient IMO, we just need more police to enforce the laws we already have, and the courts to grow the testicles to support the police!!:doublesho

yes I'm a biker  but it's something I believe would stop so much uninsured and bad driving


----------



## dann2707 (Mar 25, 2011)

But I use my phone as a music player which is connect by AUX to my headunit, if I look down to turn my song to the next one, is that me being on my phone or playing with the radio (which isn't illegal) ?


----------



## streaky (Dec 2, 2006)

puckacostello said:


> thin people should loose their licence on the spot!


Thats a bit unfair. Sorry couldn't resist


----------



## SarahAnn (Apr 6, 2011)

I was travelling up the M1 yesterday from Derby to the M18 and we were at a standstill. I was in the middle lane and there was a police van to the left of me. To my right, in a battered Punto, there was a young lad chatting away on his phone. I kept hanging back in the middle lane as we were stop/start/stop/start hoping that the officer would see the chump on the phone but she didn't so he carried on for about 15 minutes while we were queuing and then moving an inch and stopping 

He was oblivious to anyone around him including the big police transit van. 

Penalties should be massive and then people might realise how important it is.


----------

