UK to Close Loophole That Allows Phone Users to Take Photos or Play Games While Driving

[Reason077]

What you can't do is hold the phone in your hand. Picking up a phone to enter a sat-nav destination is not allowed (in future), but using the same screen whilst it's in a cradle is OK, as it is no different to using the car's in-built display.

It's not much different to using a car's display except that the phone's display is typically smaller and not really designed to be used while driving. Buttons and controls may be smaller, harder to read at a distance, etc.

Ideally you should use Siri to set up navigation, which works much better than voice commands for navigation on most cars I've driven (even Teslas!).

Or even better, use CarPlay, which almost all modern cars support. Except Teslas.

 

[idrewuk]

All talk and no action. So the law will be changed but, just like currently, I’ll see people doing it every day with no change in behaviour. I see dozens of drivers using their phone while driving every day and this won’t change it one bit. People are selfish.

 

[Northgrove]

So technically if you started driving and you want to set your navigation on the phone you’re not allowed, but you can do that from the cars navigation system?

Yes, but I think it's harder to enforce this so there's less point with a law about it. The point is that a cop can clearly see a guy holding up a phone by his/her face. Obviously it is still a safety risk if not for you, but for others, to fiddle with car controls in the wrong situations.

 

[Unsupported]

While this is a sensible change to the legislation, it shouldn't make much difference in practice. Even without the change, drivers could be prosecuted for dangerous driving when using a phone to film while driving. There was only a problem because prosecutors charged people with the wrong offence.

There is also the offence of "Driving Without Due Care & Attention".

Driving without due care and attention is also known as careless driving or inconsiderate driving. The Road Traffic Act 1988 defines this as, driving that:

• Falls below the standard expected of a competent driver, or
• That does not show reasonable consideration for other people using the road.

A charge of driving without due care and attention can arise from a momentary lack of concentration, simple mistake or lack of judgement. Examples of driving without due care are:

• Allowing yourself to be distracted by doing something else, e.g. eating, drinking or smoking
• Trying to look after passengers in the car
• Carrying an unsafe load
• Causing an accident where injury is caused
• Causing damage to another vehicle or property
• Changing a CD or radio station
• ‘Tail-gating’ another vehicle
• Driving through a red traffic light
• Undertaking
• Driving into a pedestrian

Home

Independent, expert lawyers offering unparalleled levels of expertise in dealing with the highest profile cases. Cardiff, Croydon, London and Woking.

loopholelaw.com

 

[Northgrove]

There is also the offence of "Driving Without Due Care & Attention".

Interesting -- I wonder why phone usage wasn't just integrated in this one.

 

[ian87w]

Wait what? You would think that the goal of the original law was to prevent distracted driving. But it's like a technicality that "I am not texting or calling, I am doing live Twitch streaming of myself playing games while driving so it's okay." 😅

 

[Unsupported]

Interesting -- I wonder why phone usage wasn't just integrated in this one.

I guess it is already covered in "Allowing yourself to be distracted by doing something else, e.g. eating, drinking or smoking".

Although it seems that "Driving Without Due Care & Attention" is mostly applied where an acident has occured.

In fact many years ago I rode my motorcycle into the back of a car that was stopped at night on a country road without lights in the UK.

I was initially charged with "Driving Without Due Care & Attention" but it was dropped. :-/

 

[aperantos]

We're not a free country, all this is about really.

It will be a shock to people of free countries that in the U.K. you cannot just drive a car but have to pass a test to be given a licence first.

So you are not allowed to hold your phone in your hand while driving, but you can hold coffee or other stuff. What if I hold a video camera or a book?!

I suppose the government assumes that if drinking coffee is such an attention requiring task that it distracts you from the road then you would not have passed your driving test in the first place.

What needs to be understood about the law with effect to driving in the U.K. is that there are two main laws which cover most situations, and as such are not specified by specific behaviour or actions but the effect or outcome of those behaviours or outcomes.

But certain specific activities are explicitly prohibited, usually to avoid the vagueness of the above and to set fixed penalties for them. For example if someone caught using their phone whilst driving were to argue they were are a great driver and were not distracted a judge could accept that. But it is an activity where there is a public interest in it being an absolute offence, as with driving whilst intoxicated, because it is an unnecessary risk and can never be proven that you were fully in control just because a situation never developed requiring you to quickly react.

Where a specific offence does not apply those two main laws are "careless, and inconsiderate, driving" and the most serious "dangerous driving." Reading a book would be governed by these, most likely being deemed dangerous. drinking coffee (which should be illegal in any circumstance for not being tea) could fall foul of either law if it causes you a distraction depending on how it effects your driving.

Anyway, for reference these are the legal definitions of those two laws

Road Traffic Act 1988, Sections 2, 2A, and 3

Dangerous driving.

A person who drives a mechanically propelled vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence.

(1) For the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above a person is to be regarded as driving dangerously if (and, subject to subsection (2) below, only if) —

(a) the way he drives falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and

(b) it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

(2) A person is also to be regarded as driving dangerously for the purposes of sections 1 and 2 above if it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving the vehicle in its current state would be dangerous.

(3) In subsections (1) and (2) above “dangerous” refers to danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property; and in determining for the purposes of those subsections what would be expected of, or obvious to, a competent and careful driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.

(4) In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above the state of a vehicle, regard may be had to anything attached to or carried on or in it and to the manner in which it is attached or carried.

Careless, and inconsiderate, driving.

If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence.[/qoute]

Note: The section 1 referred to is "Causing death by dangerous driving," and there is also a section 1A "Causing serious injury by dangerous driving."

 

[manu chao]

So technically if you started driving and you want to set your navigation on the phone you’re not allowed, but you can do that from the cars navigation system?

One has to draw the line somewhere. Hands-free is simple enough distinction, another one could be that you are allowed to operate anything that is fixed and does not require you to hold with your hands (which then would include a phone inside a fixed mount).

 

[beanbaguk]

We're not a free country, all this is about really.

It’s ridiculous isn’t it?

I mean just 2 weeks ago, I woman hit my car as she drifted across the lanes while playing on her her mobile phone. How dare she not have the right to use her phone while driving!!!!!

I mean, this is why we have insurance, right?

And with the sarcasm now ended, I truly condone the use of any hand-held device while driving. That woman could have killed me, or herself. Luckily it was nothing more than a scrape on my car, but even still she denied it even though I had dash cam footage backing me up and clearly showing her using her phone and drifting across my lane.

However I digress somewhat. Those asking about navigation. Use a cradle and set it up before you depart. If you need to adjust anything, pull over and do it.

The fact is simple. You cannot focus on good, safe driving standards while fiddling with a hand-held device.

If you claim you can, you are deluded, wrong and a danger to others on the road if you practice this.

 

[twistedpixel8]

It angers me so much when I look in the rear view mirror and the driver behind has their eyes down and face illuminated. I have started putting my car in reverse and slowly backing toward them. They eventually notice and panic smash the horn. Very entertaining. Gets them off the phone too.

I personally feel that a 6 month driving ban should be the punishment when caught. Rich people don’t give a toss about fines. They care about not being able to drive their M5 like a tosser though.

 

[beanbaguk]

Why would you be holding a book?

I’ve seen morons doing this while driving.

 

[jlwarlow]

Setup satnav before driving, if you need to change during ask Siri/Google.

 

[quatermass]

And what if you are not the driver, but a car passenger, and you happen to be on vacation, and wanted a snapshot of the scenic vista past your window? That is now banned?

You answered your own question there - "not the driver". Law applies to those doing the driving.

 

[beanbaguk]

So you are not allowed to hold your phone in your hand while driving, but you can hold coffee or other stuff. What if I hold a video camera or a book?!

If you are drinking a coffee, you can keep your eyes on the road. Comparing this to a mobile device which requires you to take your eyes off the road is like comparing chalk and cheese.

However, if you are caught using a video camera or reading a book while driving, I hope you get your license taken from you and torn up. That’s just as stupid, if not more than using a mobile device.......no, it’s the same. It’s completely moronic to use a device that requires your focus and concentration while driving.

If you insist on this, get yourself CarPlay. Don’t have it in your car? Get it retrofitted. There are so many options in the market to fit all budgets. If you can afford a smart phone, you can afford a hands-free kit and possibly even a CarPlay integration.

 

[davidjytang]

So technically if you started driving and you want to set your navigation on the phone you’re not allowed, but you can do that from the cars navigation system?

In my neighborhood, it is against regulation to operate navigation system in motion. Don't know about other parts of the world though.

EDIT: Looked it up again. It is against regulation to operate phone and satnav as long as the engine is running.

 

[tridley68]

feel free to kill yourself when driving distracted, but no one else.

It's about big brother controlling you.

 

[davidjytang]

Wait what? You would think that the goal of the original law was to prevent distracted driving. But it's like a technicality that "I am not texting or calling, I am doing live Twitch streaming of myself playing games while driving so it's okay." 😅

It is true the intent was to prohibit fatal distractions.
What is considered distraction must be clearly stated for people to follow. Unfortunately, the old law did not state clear enough so that cases against the original intent could be made.

 

[aperantos]

All talk and no action. So the law will be changed but, just like currently, I’ll see people doing it every day with no change in behaviour. I see dozens of drivers using their phone while driving every day and this won’t change it one bit. People are selfish.

Despite what those who complain about police states and free societies seem to think, you cannot have a police office tailing every driver. So sadly you are right.

I agree with others who have said the fines should be larger, and linked to a proportion of income. Which is the case for the two main laws.

Dorset police made a video of offences which had been prosecuted from dashcam footage. It generated some controversy on various forums because in isolation the fines seems out of proportion with each other, but that was because the magistrates had taken income and prior offences into account.

The video is on the Twitter account of the Surry Road Policing Unit here:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1299483307135168513

Probably the most controversial was the one in Weymouth where someone crossed the roundabout from the wrong side of the traffic island but is only fined £157. It does though include someone using their phone whilst driving, which illustrates why it needs to be a separate offence as it would have been difficult to claim it was carless or dangerous.

 

[beanbaguk]

This came up in a ad through YouTube at this very moment. Those complaining, sound like the obtuse individuals complaining about seatbelts when they were introduced back in the 60’s.

 

[dogslobber]

What if you're in a Tesla 3 and its driving? Stupid brit didn't think of that one, did they?

 

[beanbaguk]

It's about big brother controlling you.

The same people with your ideology said the same about seat belts in cars back in the 60’s.....

 

[aperantos]

Wait what? You would think that the goal of the original law was to prevent distracted driving. But it's like a technicality that "I am not texting or calling, I am doing live Twitch streaming of myself playing games while driving so it's okay." 😅

The problem is the original bill was introduced in 2005 and passed into law in 2006, before the first iPhone was even announced, so lacked the vision of how much a simple "telephone" would be capable of in the future.

When drafting laws you need to make them as specific as possible to reduce scope for them to be argued against, and because it is better to have loopholes which can be closed later than have them accidentally encompass other legal activities. i.e. the principal that it is better a guilty person is set free than an innocent one imprisoned.

Unfortunately sometimes the law is slow to catch up and situations like the one in the news story happened. Althogh as danckwerts said earlier, in that case the problem was the prosecutor charging them with the wrong offence. It could have been charged as careless driving which would then have not allowed that technicality.

 

[beanbaguk]

What if you're in a Tesla 3 and its driving? Stupid brit didn't think of that one, did they?

Well, as a ”Brit” I’ll take that one personally.

Tesla’s are not infalible and they do require driver input. In fact, Tesla themselves state you should always remain aware and in control of your vehicle while driving “autonomously”, because it isn’t 100% autonomous.

 

[beanbaguk]

Am I right in assumimg that you are one of those people who believe that obeying the rules concerning COVID-19 is also an infringement of your rights and Civil Liberties?

If that is indeed the case I'll give you the same reply that I gave to somebody else with that attitude.

If you knew that you were infected with AIDS would you refuse to use a condom in your sexual relations?

The laws concerning driving without due care and attention are also designed to prevent people putting their lives, and the lives at others at risk.

You do not have the right to put my live, or the lives of others at risk.

In a free country, such as the UK, your freedoms end where mine begin.

Bang on. You couldn’t have put it better.

This has absolutely nothing to do with civil liberties. This is about public safety and protecting us from each other.

The last few years in politics has been a lesson to us all. Civil liberties don’t always lead to smart choices.