Reporting mobile use while driving

[Deleted member 26715]

Quick question - apologies if answered upthread - is it illegal these days to use a phone behind the wheel if stationary?
(i stress I'm not a driver these days so not contemplating any dodgy driving)

Theoretically yes, if you are in charge of a vehicle & on the phone you are liable, even to extent that if you are pulled over at the side of the road, not in gear, handbrake on with the engine switched off you could still be prosecuted, although I think that has yet to be tested in court.

 

[Drago]

Unless you are parked lawfully, handbrake applied, and engine off, and (ideally, to remove all doubt that your are at that moment in charge) keys out of the ignition, your license can expect a swift punch in the kindneys from the Sweeney. Exception is when calling 999 in an emergency.

 

[Arjimlad]

Avon & Somerset send out a NIP if the driver is stationary, usually in traffic or at a red light. They're distracted & in charge of a car. Today's example shows how drivers will set off whilst their attention is still held by their phone.

 

[Drago]

No need to NIP for mobile phone use, its ism't a CHAMPSDG offence. They'll get a name the driver form, and once they've returned that they'll get a court date.

 

[Arjimlad]

No need to NIP for mobile phone use, its ism't a CHAMPSDG offence. They'll get a name the driver form, and once they've returned that they'll get a court date.

Ah. Here's hoping. I cannot get an answer from them as to whether any 3rd party camera footage has ever resulted in a prosecution for mobile phone use. One reviewing officer said that they put them forward for prosecution but get knocked back every time. Seems odd when the Met are dishing out FPN and convictions based on this evidence according to more prolific London-based cyclists. At least they get proper feedback. Why do you mention CHAMPSDG - I thought that was a list of animals for reportable collisions? I think I was saying NIP thinking of the name the driver form.

 

[Drago]

Ah blimey, it's an acronym denoting classes off offences that are notifiable, recordable, or NIP able...but after 3 decades I cant remember half of them! Sorry!

Certainly here in poshshire they do, albeit I suspect infrequently. First county in the UK to get a driver banned on the basis of dashcam footage, so they occasionally do something right.

Keep up the good work

 

[benb]

Why do you mention CHAMPSDG - I thought that was a list of animals for reportable collisions?

You are correct. Cow, Horse, Ass, Mule, Pig, Sheep, Dog, Goat.

Mobile phone offences do not require a NIP, but it's got nothing to do with CHAMPSDG.

Offences that require a NIP are dangerous driving, careless driving, speeding and disobeying traffic signs and traffic signals. Anything involving a collision or an injury do not require a NIP.

 

[Arjimlad]

Just had an informative chat. I am emailing two superintendents. I am asking whether A&S Police actually ever prosecute third-party reported mobile phone abuse. The Dashcam officers say "seeking to prosecute" but apparently the Criminal Justice department usually does not prosecute. It is very much at odds with what others are achieving in London. I think I misunderstood "seeking to prosecute" as NIP.

 

[Drago]

You are correct. Cow, Horse, Ass, Mule, Pig, Sheep, Dog, Goat.

Mobile phone offences do not require a NIP, but it's got nothing to do with CHAMPSDG.

Offences that require a NIP are dangerous driving, careless driving, speeding and disobeying traffic signs and traffic signals. Anything involving a collision or an injury do not require a NIP.

Ah, that's it. Was rather off beam! I recall saying "chimpspg", sniggering, getting shouted at by the trainer....


I don't know what A and S are set up, but Justice Departments are administrative. Decisions to prosecute rests with the police for summary and admitted either way offences, or the CPS for indictable or non admitted either way offences (with a few exceptions to that rule, such as where racially aggravated, etc). The civilians in between prepare files for court and push paper, they play no part in the decision making process.

All motoring offences up to careless and dangerous (in the case of dangerous, where admitted, but at the lower end of the scale) are solely the decision of the police to charge or summons, so don't let the superninetendo's give you any guff - the investigating officers supervisor makes the decision on prosecution, and no one else. No one then has the authority to countermand that decision, although the CPS has several mechanisms by which they can then halt the process wt the first hearing. If Avon and Somerset aren't charging, it's because a police officer somewhere is making the decision not to - that decision could likely be a policy one made by the scrambled egg ranks, but it is nevertheless a decision that only the police can make.

 

[Arjimlad]

Ah, that's it. Was rather off beam! I recall saying "chimpspg", sniggering, getting shouted at by the trainer....


I don't know what A and S are set up, but Justice Departments are administrative. Decisions to prosecute rests with the police for summary and admitted either way offences, or the CPS for indictable or non admitted either way offences (with a few exceptions to that rule, such as where racially aggravated, etc). The civilians in between prepare files for court and push paper, they play no part in the decision making process.

All motoring offences up to careless and dangerous (in the case of dangerous, where admitted, but at the lower end of the scale) are solely the decision of the police to charge or summons, so don't let the superninetendo's give you any guff - the investigating officers supervisor makes the decision on prosecution, and no one else. No one then has the authority to countermand that decision, although the CPS has several mechanisms by which they can then halt the process wt the first hearing. If Avon and Somerset aren't charging, it's because a police officer somewhere is making the decision not to - that decision could likely be a policy one made by the scrambled egg ranks, but it is nevertheless a decision that only the police can make.

Thanks - that's very helpful and I think it chimes with what I am given to understand. The dashcam review officers are not of the same mind as the decision making officers.

 

[Arjimlad]

Got another "seeking to prosecute" outcome but this one came with a crime reference number. Very clear footage of interaction with the phone in a moving car.

They are sending a NIP to have the driver identified.

 

[RoadRider400]

Great work mate.
How do the drivers react to this? Do you tell them that you are going for prosecutions?
I presume you need to get a photo of number plate too?
Wouldnt it be great if this was rolled out as a national scheme whereby cyclists and pedestrians can submit such videos and the drivers get heavily punished and fast tracked to court with minimal input from the police. High fines could then offset any admin costs of the court.

 

[Drago]

Ha ha, brilliant! They should give you a job doing nothing but that. In fact, employing a single copper to ride about in plain clothes doing nothing but that would be white cost effective if they're serious about casualty reduction.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

A self funding post, target them with 20 kills a day, have to have photo of driver with phone in hand along with registration plate, 20 x £200 = £4,000 a day, 5 days a week £20,000, 46 weeks a year (taking into account 6 weeks holiday) = £920,000 a year. I'd take that on a 10% margin as self employed.

 

[Arjimlad]

Great work mate.
How do the drivers react to this? Do you tell them that you are going for prosecutions?
I presume you need to get a photo of number plate too?
Wouldnt it be great if this was rolled out as a national scheme whereby cyclists and pedestrians can submit such videos and the drivers get heavily punished and fast tracked to court with minimal input from the police. High fines could then offset any admin costs of the court.

I spotted her doing this as I emerged from a side road. Drawing up behind the car gave me a clear shot of the number plate.

I asked if she needed a little official encouragement to put the phone away whilst driving, she said no thanks, she was fine, and carried on. I asked if she thought she could be safely trusted with a phone and a car at the same time and she said yes and carried on. I explained how it was hazardous for people like me and she wound up her window and carried on. So I uploaded the footage.

Last time I had a conversation the bloke was very apologetic and put the phone away (not just down) immediately. So I didn't report him.

The Met seem very ready to use footage like this to send out some sort of fixed penalty with six points & £200 fine. Avon & Somerset seem a bit less bullish about it.