Sticking Stuff to Windscreens
Discussion
Given that driving your car with a damaged windscreen can be dangerous and that having a stonechip in the wiper 'sweep' area will fail the M.O.T., is there any law that restricts what you can put on your windscreen, and where?
I've driven behind some cars that have navigation systems and/or mobile phones attached to be, IMO, stupid and dangerous positions. For example, a guy in a Volvo V70 today had his mobile phone sitting in a cradle which was attached to the middle of the windscreen just under the rear view mirror and a sat-nav to the left-middle of the 290mm 'direct drivers vision' - also attached to the screen... it was staring him in the face just above the steering wheel; surley this is illegal (and dangerous)?
Regulation 30 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 states that the driver of a motor vehicle is to have a full view of the road and traffic ahead and that all glass or transparent material on the vehicle should be maintained free from obstruction of the driver's vision.
Prosecution will of course be at the discretion of any officer dealing with the offence.
Prosecution will of course be at the discretion of any officer dealing with the offence.
vonhosen said:
Prosecution will of course be at the discretion of any officer dealing with the offence.
Prosecution? Do you mean 'charging'?
Discretion suggests that if pulled over 'under suspicion', a driver can pop the cradle off the screen and quickly rub away the suction mark on the glass (and promise not to be so naughty again) to avoid a charge.
glassman said:
vonhosen said:
Prosecution will of course be at the discretion of any officer dealing with the offence.
Prosecution? Do you mean 'charging'?
Discretion suggests that if pulled over 'under suspicion', a driver can pop the cradle off the screen and quickly rub away the suction mark on the glass (and promise not to be so naughty again) to avoid a charge.
If you were going to be prosecuted for the offence then it is likely that it would be by way of summons, not charging.
Discretion is where there is sufficient evidence for the officer to proceed with several courses of action, (NFA, warn, summons etc) but they exercise their own judgement as to the most appropriate course for the circumstances.
Something to consider is that what would be a totally stupid position for one person to stick a phone cradle/satnav/etc could easily be another persons ideal position. I like to drive sitting fairly upright, whereas my wife prefers to sit back a bit more - I hate having the upper half of the screen obscured by anything, because with my higher eyeline that's the part of the screen I most use for my forward vision, but my wife isn't bothered by this because from her lower eyeline that upper part of the screen mostly just gives her a view of the sky.
Not that I'm suggesting every single screen-mounted device is in a position which still affords a good view for the driver - some clearly ARE in dodgy positions no matter where the drivers eyeline is, but it's a bit dangerous to write off all screen mounts as badly placed without knowing what it looks like from the exact point of view of the driver.
Not that I'm suggesting every single screen-mounted device is in a position which still affords a good view for the driver - some clearly ARE in dodgy positions no matter where the drivers eyeline is, but it's a bit dangerous to write off all screen mounts as badly placed without knowing what it looks like from the exact point of view of the driver.
i seem to recall there being several prosecutions over the last few years of people with restricted vision, i think one was a car on a test drive, which still had the massive price sign hanging from the mirror, and another was a woman on the way to work on a frosty morning, and all she had cleared was a six inch patch of her windscreen.
i think, from memory, that both of these prosecutions were after the cars had crashed, and i think the lady with the frosted up windscreen killed someone on a crossing as well.
i've seen quite a few reps type cars with a notepad one side, and a mobile phone and sat nav on the other,i'd have thought these must interfere with vision enough to be a hazzard.
Marki said:
glassman said:
I've driven behind some cars that have navigation systems and/or mobile phones attached to be, IMO, stupid and dangerous positions.
I see this all the time ,, have been wondering how they are not getting pulled by the Old Bill all the time
We don't need Plod on the roads any more - we've got cameras instead, remember?
saxmund said:
chrisgr31 said:
The real question is why you need a notepad when driving!
er... that's where you write your directions? Or a list of places you have to visit?
By jove I do hope these types keep one hand on the wheel when writing the list
but then as long as they stick to the speed limit the cameras don't mind and exercise their own type of discretion 
I've got one (although it's attached to the dash as there is nowhere to attach it the windscreen withiout obscuring vision). I write directions on it before leaving on a trip. A bit like SatNav, only it's cheaper and a more powerful computer is used to plot the route. I had one attached to the windscreen in my old car, and as another poster said, the only thing it obscured was my view of the bonnet.
Marki said:
chrisgr31 said:
eccles said:
i've seen quite a few reps type cars with a notepad one side,
The real question is why you need a notepad when driving!
Exactly whats wrong with the back of your fag packet
- Streaky Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff