The Law Is Not Working

[BSRU]

Just come from another place where I read something quite disturbing.
It seems if you are caught using a mobile phone whilst driving and deny it, the Police/CPS will/cannot do anything about it.

 

[subaqua]

Just come from another place where I read something quite disturbing.
It seems if you are caught using a mobile phone whilst driving and deny it, the Police/CPS will/cannot do anything about it.

is about right. Sadly

 

[G-Zero]

Unbelievable if its true.

If the CPS/Magistrates are going down that route ie. Not prepared to take a cop's word over that of an offender, the Police should simply seize the mobile as evidence of the offence.

Word would soon get round that a driver is automatically going to lose their phone until such time as a ticket is complied with, or possibly even for several months, until the phone can be produced to a court.

 

[gaz]

Just come from another place where I read something quite disturbing.
It seems if you are caught using a mobile phone whilst driving and deny it, the Police/CPS will/cannot do anything about it.

Unless there is evidence that they where, then it's the same old situation that i'm sure we are all used to. Their word against ours.
If the Police/CPS started charging people with various offences without evidence then i'm sure we would be up in arms.

The standard procedure for dealing with mobile drivers is a Fixed Penalty Notice, which the CPS does not get involved in. (unless the driver decides to take it to court)
So I presume this is based around something a lot bigger, can we get more information?

 

[PBancroft]

I think that's fair enough - unless you mean that if there is evidence as well but but the perpetrator is let off anyway if they deny it, in which case that's ridiculous.

I was once accused of damaging property by a member of the public. They threatened to call the Police, who I'm sure wouldn't have done a thing about it - one, because there was no evidence of any damage, and two, the property I was "damaging" was my own. If the Police were involved I would of course have denied it.

FWIW I was dancing 'The Robot' on top of my car for a dare. Yes, I was sober.

 

[Archie_tect]

Innocent until proved guilty... works for me... not hearsay or one [possibly biased] person's word against another.

 

[Mozzy]

Surely there is no defence as calls and times are logged. Also do they not film it if following a vehicle?

 

[hotfuzzrj]

Is it safe to assume OP means if a member of public reports a driver using their phone (who then denies it) then the police won't do anything?
Because I have given tickets to drivers I've SEEN on the phone. They can deny all they want in the back of the car, but after gently reminding people that some Mags give larger fines to people who initially deny then eventually admit the offence, I've never been called to court to give evidence! I assume they have paid up and not just that courts haven't bothered to do anything.
(And in case people start mentioning evil Old Bill giving out useless tickets, it is horrid having to clear up a crash site and/or see a body cut out of a car because someone was on a phone. Chilling.)

On a side note, if someone reported a driver using their phone to me I would be more likely to write to the registered keeper and just warn them, as it is dfficult to prove who was driving at the time of the offence, not all reg keepers are the sole drivers of their vehicles.

 

[BSRU]

The initial conversation was about video evidence but one poster had a reply from their local Police stating that it had become increasingly difficult to prosecute even if observed by a Police officer as they need to prove the mobile phone was being used as a mobile phone. If someone denies it or states they were recording a voice message for them self, like a Dictaphone function.

Police officers who have reported persons for this offence are finding that if the motorist pleads not guilty it is increasingly difficult to prove to the satisfaction of the court that the offence under Regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles(Construction and Use ) Regulations 1986 has been committed.

 

[the snail]

Surely they could look at the call log?

 

[gaz]

As far as i'm aware the law regarding using a mobile phone whilst driving is not limited to the function of making a call. Using a phone for say making a dictation is also agains the law.
I believe the law states something along the lines of 'something that must be held during the course of action'. Let me check...

The law on this can be found here
It states the following:

(6) For the purposes of this regulation—

(a) a mobile telephone or other device is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or must be, held at some point during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function;​

(b)...​

(c)​

(i) “interactive communication function” includes the following:​

(ii) sending or receiving oral or written messages;​

(iii) sending or receiving facsimile documents;​

(iv) sending or receiving still or moving images; and providing access to the internet;​

The information on this website clear states that it is possible to get away with such a charge if it can not be proved that you where physically talking or using the phone.

I think it's a fair point, but lets be honest, we all know about this law and there is little reason to hold your mobile phone whilst driving. To be in proper control of our vehicles we should be concentrating on driving and be holding the wheel with two hands.

 

[BSRU]

I think it's a fair point, but lets be honest, we all know about this law and there is little reason to hold your mobile phone whilst driving. To be in proper control of our vehicles we should be concentrating on driving and be holding the wheel with two hands.

The problem in the current economic climate are the Police/CPS willing to go to court for a "minor" driving offence if there is a chance the prosecution will fail. The general feeling locally is the Police/CPS have given up on "minor" crime, unfortunately the list of what is considered "minor" seems to be growing.

 

[gaz]

The problem in the current economic climate are the Police/CPS willing to go to court for a "minor" driving offence if there is a chance the prosecution will fail. The general feeling locally is the Police/CPS have given up on "minor" crime, unfortunately the list of what is considered "minor" seems to be growing.

I see the opposite, the Police and CPS are only willing to go to court for major driving offences.

Things like driving whilst on the phone which is dealt by an FPN, only goes to court if the driver chooses to do so.

 

[BSRU]

I see the opposite, the Police and CPS are only willing to go to court for major driving offences.

Things like driving whilst on the phone which is dealt by an FPN, only goes to court if the driver chooses to do so.

My post was badly worded,
In the current economic climate, are the Police/CPS willing to go to court for a "minor" driving offence if there is a chance the prosecution will fail?

 

[gaz]

My post was badly worded,
In the current economic climate, are the Police/CPS willing to go to court for a "minor" driving offence if there is a chance the prosecution will fail?

They have never been imo.