Using mobile phone when stopped/parked

[HertsBiker]

Paul, good post. Well reasoned.

[WD39]

Rick101 said:

Our company policy (Railway) has recently been updated to reflect this.
No more talking on hands free. You must be stopped and engine off.

Whilst I agree it's a safe way to do things, it's shameful that the Police are taking the opportunity of as easy catch. The PCC's should be implementing some common sense policing.

What a fantastic company you work for.
If only all commercial enterprises that encompass driving would enforce this rule.
Well done them, (whoever they are).

[rambo19]

WD39 said:

Rick101 said:

Our company policy (Railway) has recently been updated to reflect this.
No more talking on hands free. You must be stopped and engine off.

Whilst I agree it's a safe way to do things, it's shameful that the Police are taking the opportunity of as easy catch. The PCC's should be implementing some common sense policing.

What a fantastic company you work for.
If only all commercial enterprises that encompass driving would enforce this rule.
Well done them, (whoever they are).

I work for a large bus company, we cannot use/touch/look at our phones whilst in the drivers cab at anytime. If caught, instant dismissal.

[Nigel Worc's]

WD39 said:

Rick101 said:

Our company policy (Railway) has recently been updated to reflect this.
No more talking on hands free. You must be stopped and engine off.

Whilst I agree it's a safe way to do things, it's shameful that the Police are taking the opportunity of as easy catch. The PCC's should be implementing some common sense policing.

What a fantastic company you work for.
If only all commercial enterprises that encompass driving would enforce this rule.
Well done them, (whoever they are).

That'll happen when customers stop expecting you to be contactable all the time.

[WD39]

p1esk said:

Escort3500 said:

Quite an interesting case on the local news programme tonight. A motorist has just been fined £100 and hit with 3 points for using her phone while driving. On the face of it, sounds right.

According to the news item she was stopped at the side of the road, handbrake on but engine running. That (apparently) is an offence; she should have switched the engine off and removed the key from the ignition the reporter said. I'm sure this isn't the first such conviction in the country in these circumstances, but it seems a bit harsh to me. The police have discretion apparently, but clearly didn't consider it appropriate to exercise it on this occasion. I always stop to use the phone, but don't always cut the engine off - obviously will in future though.

So, was she fairly treated; what's the PH view?

I didn't know you were also supposed to remove the key from the ignition, and I doubt if that bit is true; but I did understand that you're supposed to be stopped and have the engine switched off before using a hand-held phone.

In my view she was treated harshly: it wasn't sensible policing.

I would imagine that the law is reflecting a positive view that states if the engine is off and the key removed the driver is in a completely safe condition to use a mobile phone.

Another example is that you are not allowed to hold your phone while driving even if you are not connected. This alleviates any confusion that the driver MAY have been on the phone, from a police perspective.

[WD39]

speedyguy said:

Rick101 said:

Our company policy (Railway) has recently been updated to reflect this.
No more talking on hands free. You must be stopped and engine off.

A large construction company where i used to work has taken to having the Bluetooth systems disabled in the reps cars and a policy of company phones in the boot.

Another brilliant company!!

[WD39]

Paul_M3 said:

staniland said:

Correct. It's worse:


Tests by scientists at the Transport Research Laboratory said drivers on mobiles had slower reaction times and stopping times than those under the influence of alcohol.

And it said hands-free kits were almost as dangerous as hand-held phones.

The research said reaction times were, on average, 30% slower when talking on a mobile than when just over the legal limit, and nearly 50% slower than when driving normally.

That sounds a bit suspect to me.

Let's say an average reaction time is 250ms.

They say being on a phone is 50% slower, so 375ms. (probably still quicker than a 75 year old in their Micra)

They then say being on a phone is 30% slower than being drunk. Therefore the 'being drunk' reaction time must be 290ms.

If being drunk only increases reaction time by 0.04 seconds, I don't understand why the drink drive limit it so low!

I wonder what the reaction time is of someone finding their fags, finding their lighter, lighting the fag and then putting the fags/lighter away.
I bet we're talking nearer seconds than fractions of a second.

I'm not saying using your phone while driving is a good idea. That would be nonsense.

I'm just saying I think a lot of these statistics are questionable, and for all the fuss made about using a phone while driving I bet you could equally prove that things like smoking, changing a cd, or talking to screaming kids is just as distracting, if not worse.

They say using your phone increases your reaction timme by 0.125 seconds, but think about how long you look at the radio when you change stations.

Disclaimer: Before I get pounced on by the anti-phone brigade, my car has hands free, but even then I hardly ever use it.

It has been suggested, and backed up by surveys and evaluations that it is the remoteness of a phone conversation that is the hazardous aspect.
Speaking to someone who has no idea what driving situation you are in. You also might have to:
Evaluate information.
Make a decision.
Follow instructions
Remember an address.
Re-book an appointment.
Etc Etc.
All Whilst driving. (and all that entails.)

[Paul_M3]

WD39 said:

It has been suggested, and backed up by surveys and evaluations that it is the remoteness of a phone conversation that is the hazardous aspect.
Speaking to someone who has no idea what driving situation you are in. You also might have to:
Evaluate information.
Make a decision.
Follow instructions
Remember an address.
Re-book an appointment.
Etc Etc.
All Whilst driving. (and all that entails.)

I fully understand that line of thinking (which is clearly correct), but it doesn't necessarily make it any different from various other distractions.

You could argue that the first four things on your list are done as part of normal driving when NOT using a phone.

A couple of 9 year old kids in the back of your car talking about their school day, asking if you can stop at McDonalds for tea, starting to fight each other etc would also have no idea of the driving situation you are in.

What about Sat Navs built into the dashboards of cars? I would argue that simply talking on a phone whilst still constantly looking at the road is far less dangerous than a person in unfamiliar surroundings looking down at an LCD screen every 10 seconds when trying to spot their junction.

I appreciate that I'm coming across as an advocate of phone use whilst driving, and this is not my intention. I just don't like false statistics and things being labelled as 'the most dangerous thing in the world' when in reality a sensibly used phone is probably no more dangerous than many other things people do whilst driving.

Unfortunately it's not practical for the Police to differentiate between someone who makes a 20 second call to say they'll be late home whilst driving down a long straight road, and somebody who spends the entire journey on their phone conducting business deals whilst negotiating roundabouts etc.

What they could do however, is give a bit of leeway to somebody who is clearly not going to be a danger. i.e. stopped safely at the side of the road, but with the engine still running.

[Vipers]

'

Paul_M3 said:

What they could do however, is give a bit of leeway to somebody who is clearly not going to be a danger. i.e. stopped safely at the side of the road, but with the engine still running.

I wonder how many contributors on here knew about the need to have the engine turned off, key out?

I knew you shouldn't use a hand held whilst driving, but I thought, parked in a layby, in neutral handbrake on was OK, I had no idea about engine off key out.

Come clean guys, did you all know that? I also didn't know that the use of a hand held phone doesn't apply to a cyclists.

This link doesn't mention it

https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-drivin...

[agtlaw]

Vipers said:

I wonder how many contributors on here knew about the need to have the engine turned off, key out?

I knew you shouldn't use a hand held whilst driving, but I thought, parked in a layby, in neutral handbrake on was OK, I had no idea about engine off key out.

No-one realised, because that's not the law. If you read the OP properly then you would see that one person accepted a fixed penalty from a police officer. Not even a court hearing. A non story.

[Derek Smith]

agtlaw said:

All of the above is, as usual, completely wrong in the context of using a mobile phone. Derek, try to confine yourself to drink driving 'in charge' threads if you must cut and paste your usual nonsense.

Nicely put. I've not been rude or personal so why the nasty comments?

But just to mention for a second time: I am not referring to cases of in charge with drink driving. It is driving. The definition of the word driving is the matter in question. Not in charge. I've not mentioned in charge other than to correct you.

Let me know when it sinks in.

[Mk3Spitfire]

Edited by Mk3Spitfire on Wednesday 17th December 22:42

[Vipers]

agtlaw said:

Vipers said:

I wonder how many contributors on here knew about the need to have the engine turned off, key out?

I knew you shouldn't use a hand held whilst driving, but I thought, parked in a layby, in neutral handbrake on was OK, I had no idea about engine off key out.

No-one realised, because that's not the law. If you read the OP properly then you would see that one person accepted a fixed penalty from a police officer. Not even a court hearing. A non story.

See

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/legal-advice/...

It does says :-

Don't use a mobile phone held in the hand while driving or while stopped with the engine switched on – it is illegal.

So the question is what does the law actually say about parked up, in neutral, handbrake on, is it legal to use a hand held phone or not?

[agtlaw]

Stopped in traffic. Fair point.

Derek, not being intentionally 'rude' but what you've written is complete bks and your repeated assertions about still 'driving' whilst not even in the car are very irritating to someone who actually deals with this stuff in a courtroom this century.

[Vipers]

agtlaw said:

Stopped in traffic. Fair point.

Derek, not being intentionally 'rude' but what you've written is complete bks and your repeated assertions about still 'driving' whilst not even in the car are very irritating to someone who actually deals with this stuff in a courtroom this century.

Any chance you could clarify my understanding in my post above yours, tks.

[agtlaw]

Vipers said:

So the question is what does the law actually say about parked up, in neutral, handbrake on, is it legal to use a hand held phone or not?

Depends where you are parked but likely to be quite lawful. The offence is only made out if:

- you are on a road (but not an "other public place"); and
- the phone is hand held; and
- the phone is being used
- whilst driving

See section 41D RTA 1988 and regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.

The use of the phone must be coterminous with driving; see R v Jeffries (2013) for a discussion about 'whilst driving' v 'by driving'.

If anyone wants to argue Pepper v Hart statutory interpretation then I have the relevant government documents from the time of making the then new legislation. Including the following statement:

"We consider that drivers should not use hand-held phones while at traffic lights or during short hold-ups that may occur during a typical journey. However, we accept the view that it is unnecessary for a vehicle to be parked with the engine switched off in order to avoid prosecution."

[Vipers]

Thank you for that, clear enough for me.

[staniland]

Paul_M3 said:

I fully understand that line of thinking (which is clearly correct), but it doesn't necessarily make it any different from various other distractions.

That's a common myth.



The common conception is that passengers are able to better regulate conversation based on the perceived level of danger, therefore the risk is negligible. A study by a University of South Carolina psychology researcher featured in the journal, Experimental Psychology, found that planning to speak and speaking put far more demands on the brain’s resources than listening. Measurement of attention levels showed that subjects were four times more distracted while preparing to speak or speaking than when they were listening.[26] The Accident Research Unit at the University of Nottingham found that the number of utterances was usually higher for mobile calls when compared to blindfolded and non-blindfolded passengers across various driving conditions. The number of questions asked averaged slightly higher for mobile phone conversations, although results were not constant across road types and largely influenced by a large number of questions on the urban roads.[27]

A 2004 University of Utah simulation study that compared passenger and cell-phone conversations concluded that the driver performs better when conversing with a passenger because the traffic and driving task become part of the conversation. Drivers holding conversations on cell phones were four times more likely to miss the highway exit than those with passengers, and drivers conversing with passengers showed no statistically significant difference from lone drivers in the simulator.[28] A study led by Andrew Parkes at the Transport Research Laboratory, also with a driving simulator, concluded that hands-free phone conversations impair driving performance more than other common in-vehicle distractions such as passenger conversations.[29]

Newswise: Talking Distractions: Study Shows Why Cell Phones and Driving Don't Mix
Jump up ^ David Crundall, Manpreet Bains, Peter Chapman, Geoffrey Underwood (2005). "Regulating conversation during driving: a problem for mobile telephones?" (PDF). Transportation Research, Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 8F (3): 197–211. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2005.01.003.
Jump up ^ Drews, Frank; Monisha Pasupathi and David L. Strayer (2004). "Passenger and Cell-Phone Conversations in Simulated Driving" (PDF). Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting.
Jump up ^ Conversations in cars: the relative hazards of mobile phones

[Paul_M3]

staniland said:

Paul_M3 said:

I fully understand that line of thinking (which is clearly correct), but it doesn't necessarily make it any different from various other distractions.

That's a common myth.



The common conception is that passengers are able to better regulate conversation based on the perceived level of danger, therefore the risk is negligible. A study by a University of South Carolina psychology researcher featured in the journal, Experimental Psychology, found that planning to speak and speaking put far more demands on the brain’s resources than listening. Measurement of attention levels showed that subjects were four times more distracted while preparing to speak or speaking than when they were listening.[26] The Accident Research Unit at the University of Nottingham found that the number of utterances was usually higher for mobile calls when compared to blindfolded and non-blindfolded passengers across various driving conditions. The number of questions asked averaged slightly higher for mobile phone conversations, although results were not constant across road types and largely influenced by a large number of questions on the urban roads.[27]

A 2004 University of Utah simulation study that compared passenger and cell-phone conversations concluded that the driver performs better when conversing with a passenger because the traffic and driving task become part of the conversation. Drivers holding conversations on cell phones were four times more likely to miss the highway exit than those with passengers, and drivers conversing with passengers showed no statistically significant difference from lone drivers in the simulator.[28] A study led by Andrew Parkes at the Transport Research Laboratory, also with a driving simulator, concluded that hands-free phone conversations impair driving performance more than other common in-vehicle distractions such as passenger conversations.[29]

Newswise: Talking Distractions: Study Shows Why Cell Phones and Driving Don't Mix
Jump up ^ David Crundall, Manpreet Bains, Peter Chapman, Geoffrey Underwood (2005). "Regulating conversation during driving: a problem for mobile telephones?" (PDF). Transportation Research, Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 8F (3): 197–211. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2005.01.003.
Jump up ^ Drews, Frank; Monisha Pasupathi and David L. Strayer (2004). "Passenger and Cell-Phone Conversations in Simulated Driving" (PDF). Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting.
Jump up ^ Conversations in cars: the relative hazards of mobile phones

Sorry, what's a common myth?

All you've done there is copy and paste some statements from studies comparing talking on a phone and talking to passengers.

Can you point out in my post where I was talking about adult passengers being an equal distraction to mobile phones?
It's obvious to anybody with an IQ above 70 that a mobile phone conversation will be more distracting then an adult passenger who can also react to things happening ahead.

I was specifically talking about other distractions such as looking at radios, sat navs, talking with CHILDREN passengers etc.

The point is that (according to the things you've quoted) mobile phone use may result in a decreased reaction time of 0.1 to 0.2 seconds.

So following on from your earlier comment in the thread, do you therefore also think that all people who look down for one or two seconds to change the radio station are 'scum who should rot in jail'?

Mobile phone use while driving can be (and often is) utterly reckless and irresponsible and would warrant severe punishment.

I would however argue that it's possible to use a phone in such a way that the increase in danger to yourself and others would be insignificant.

Perhaps it's just the way I think, but for you to classify every single user of a phone whilst driving 'as scum' is completely illogical.
It's the same as classing somebody driving past a school at 3:30pm doing 50 mph, and somebody doing 90 mph on an empty motorway as equally bad.

Both are 20 mph above the speed limit, but one is a far greater danger than the other.

[p1esk]

WD39 said:

p1esk said:

It is quite right that the dangers should be acknowledged by all of us, but we should then be left to make our own judgements about what we can safely do, based on our own capabilities and the particular circumstances at the time.

Edited by p1esk on Wednesday 17th December 12:07

[/quote
/
Do you make your own judgements about other aspects of the law?

Yes, sometimes I do, and I doubt if I'm alone in doing that. You only have to recognise the amount of speeding that goes on. That's a similar situation: do I, or do I not, comply with the law at all times etc. Clearly not many people do comply in all respects at all times. This is partly because hardly anybody knows, in total, what the law requires of us. They can't know, because there is so much of it, and we can not possibly know about all of it. See the arguments that go on here about aspects of the law, and that's between people who have been, and maybe still are, involved with it on a day-to-day basis.

Edit: Er, beg pardon, but WD has cocked up the quoting, and I don't know how to sort it out. Anyhow, I've answered his question honestly.

Edited by p1esk on Thursday 18th December 18:45