Being in control of a car
Discussion
After chatting to a mate who got busted for DIU whilst sleeping in his car whilst drunk, it got me wondering about the grey areas of being in control of a car, so I'd like the 'official' line of some of the BiBs here on these 2:
1) I'm at home, cleaning the car, with the keys in the ignition to listen to the radio, when a friend calls me, I answer the phone and I'm sitting in the drivers seat. Does this consitute being in control of a car whilst on the phone?
2) Head to a local drive thru and get my order, pull up into a parking space, leave the engine running as it's cold outside and I want the heaters on. Eat my burger, and then pull away. Am I eating whilst in control of the car?
To me it seems harsh that you can be done for sleeping in a car whilst drunk, even if you are on the back seats.
ETA: Also, when can you answer a phone call in a car, is pulling over and stopping allowed?
1) I'm at home, cleaning the car, with the keys in the ignition to listen to the radio, when a friend calls me, I answer the phone and I'm sitting in the drivers seat. Does this consitute being in control of a car whilst on the phone?
2) Head to a local drive thru and get my order, pull up into a parking space, leave the engine running as it's cold outside and I want the heaters on. Eat my burger, and then pull away. Am I eating whilst in control of the car?
To me it seems harsh that you can be done for sleeping in a car whilst drunk, even if you are on the back seats.
ETA: Also, when can you answer a phone call in a car, is pulling over and stopping allowed?
Edited by theboyfold on Monday 6th August 00:16
theboyfold said:
After chatting to a mate who got busted for DIU whilst sleeping in his car whilst drunk, it got me wondering about the grey areas of being in control of a car, so I'd like the 'official' line of some of the BiBs here on these 2:
1) I'm at home, cleaning the car, with the keys in the ignition to listen to the radio, when a friend calls me, I answer the phone and I'm sitting in the drivers seat. Does this consitute being in control of a car whilst on the phone?
2) Head to a local drive thru and get my order, pull up into a parking space, leave the engine running as it's cold outside and I want the heaters on. Eat my burger, and then pull away. Am I eating whilst in control of the car?
To me it seems harsh that you can be done for sleeping in a car whilst drunk, even if you are on the back seats.
ETA: Also, when can you answer a phone call in a car, is pulling over and stopping allowed?
"In control" is not a definition on which the road traffic act relies. The important terms as far as the act is concerned are "driving" and "in charge".1) I'm at home, cleaning the car, with the keys in the ignition to listen to the radio, when a friend calls me, I answer the phone and I'm sitting in the drivers seat. Does this consitute being in control of a car whilst on the phone?
2) Head to a local drive thru and get my order, pull up into a parking space, leave the engine running as it's cold outside and I want the heaters on. Eat my burger, and then pull away. Am I eating whilst in control of the car?
To me it seems harsh that you can be done for sleeping in a car whilst drunk, even if you are on the back seats.
ETA: Also, when can you answer a phone call in a car, is pulling over and stopping allowed?
As for question 1, there would be no offence, as the specific offence of using a mobile phone can only be committed if you're driving at the same time. Being in a stationary, (parked - not stationary in traffic) car whilst on the phone is not an offence.
As for 2, again, no, as the offence you're thinking of is one of failing to maintain proper control of a vehicle, which, again, is an offence you can only commit whilst driving.
You're getting confused with the broader term of being "in charge" of a vehicle, which is relevent to the drink-driving aspects of the RTA.
"In charge" doesn't have a clearly-defined definition in law, but can be taken to mean that someone is in a position to take control of a vehicle.
There is a statutory defence to being drunk in charge. If the defendant can show that there was no likelihood that they were going to drive whilst they were still drunk, then they will be acquitted at court.
Note that this is a statutory defence. The Police do not have to prove that they were going to drive - it's up to the defence to show that they were not going to drive.
If someone is asleep in the back of a car with the engine off, they could be charged with being drunk in charge if they had access to the keys, but they could argue that they weren't going to drive until they were sober. That argument would be far less convincing if they were asleep in the drivers seat with the engine running, and in those circumstances, they'd probably be convicted.
R_U_LOCAL said:
Hammer Zeit said:
I was knocked unconscious whilst driving my car, I am still being charged for dangerous driving.
That sounds like a fairly obscure set of circumstances...My licence is under-threat and it wasn't my fault. The only civilian witness statement agrees with my statement, as far as we can assertain from the damage of the surroundings and the car, ie no skid marks and no damage to my ankles which would say, I wasn't either braking or accelerating at the time. I wasn't driving at speed, the car suddenly took off and thats what the witness said too!
I have found some evidence to back me up but I need hardcore facts of simialr instances to mine. There were some in the US with cars of the same age as mine and of the same make, 215,000 cars were recalled!
If that isn't enough proof I don't know what is?
R_U_LOCAL said:
Being knocked unconscious during an accident is a very different thing from becoming unconscious and having an accident as a result (which is what I thought you meant).
Just because you don't remember what happened doesn't mean you weren't driving dangerously.
I have an examplary driving record, never been stopped, flashed etc. That night I was working, returning back to base to do another delivery, hadn't been drinking, the breath test showed that. I was stopped at a giveway line in a 40mph zone, the car took off at speed from a stand still, in a straight line. The fact that I didn't steer or brake means that I had to be unconscious not to have fought the car to the death. It was my pride and joy and I had lavished time and money on it, it just had a new engine fitted to it, I had no reason to kill the car. Just because you don't remember what happened doesn't mean you weren't driving dangerously.
The police officer dealing with the case said there was not enough evidence to convict me and my lawyer said there would be no case to answer.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
The definition of a road under the RTA goes beyond what you might at first think. Car parks which are not repairable at public expense have been held to be a road under the RTA. It is for excise licence offences that it has to be repairable at public expense, not RTA offences like drunk in charge. Edited by vonhosen on Monday 6th August 06:49
Dwight VanDriver said:
Are you saying you had a 'blackout'?
If so DVLA medical branch will be interested.
dvd
The story is very similar to what happened to my mum. Unfortunately it was the onset of epilepsy and she had a blackout. She was hospitalised and lots of tests done. She got the all clear at the time, but the epilepsy came on within a year.If so DVLA medical branch will be interested.
dvd
Bert
"In charge" doesn't have a clearly-defined definition in law, but can be taken to mean that someone is in a position to take control of a vehicle.
so by that rationale I could be shit faced at home and simply having my car keys in my pocket would mean I was in position to take control of a vehicle...
If I went to the car to fetch some booze from something like sunnies I could also be in the poop.
so by that rationale I could be shit faced at home and simply having my car keys in my pocket would mean I was in position to take control of a vehicle...
If I went to the car to fetch some booze from something like sunnies I could also be in the poop.
havoc said:
With regard to 'not remembering the last 1/2-mile', that could just be a psychological reaction - after serious trauma the mind can sometimes 'blank out' the period during and just before the incident.
So I'd be cautious of 'diagnosing' epilepsy or something similar...
Too bloomin right... I had a biggie twenty years or so ago and my mind blanked out the four hours leading up to the accident. I couldn't remember events leading up to it then and I still can't. Plenty of people were talking to me right up to the accident and after it and I was behaving perfectly normally (if a bit random after it!) It's one of the brains clever self defence tricks So I'd be cautious of 'diagnosing' epilepsy or something similar...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff