Deterring mobile phone use

[Flinders]

Disclosure: I have my phone set to read out message and missed call notifications while I'm driving. I then either act on the information (changed appointment location or whatever), pull over and stop in a safe place to return an urgent message, or wait until my next scheduled stop and deal with it then. I don't need to look at or touch my phone while driving to do this. I don't think hands-free calling while driving is safe enough, either - as others have suggested, the law is lagging behind current research evidence on that.

I also feel that satnavs and dashcams should have to have detailed controls where they cannot be reached from the normal driving position, too. Maybe OK and cancel buttons on the wheel or similar, like how car stereos often have a "dismiss traffic alert" button on the wheel (handy for those times atmospheric skip and/or strange transmitter service areas brings you someone waffling about roads 150 miles away which you really don't need to hear), but entering new addresses and stuff should be made impossible while driving.

Your notification system seems sensible. I don't answer my mobile if it rings when I am driving. I get off the road and find a safe place to park, and then check any message in case it is urgent (I have elderly relatives in poor health). A system like yours would be much better for me, as I would be able to decide if it was necessary to change my route immediately, find somewhere to stop to answer it, or ignore it.
In fact, I rarely give anyone my mobile number, and I tell them the condition of having it is they must never to use it except by prior arrangement (if I am meeting them) or in an emergency when they must always use the landline first, so I just about never get calls when driving anyway- and that's the way I like it.
I do tear people off a strip if they use it outside those conditions. Basically, if 'm not out and about, I may not check it for a week. Tell people that and they do tend not to use it unless it is essential.

Hands free or not, I will not talk to anyone on their mobile either if I find they are driving- I end the call. I don't want to be responsible for distracting them.

When I finally got a satnav just recently, my brother helped me set it up. He told me he placed his where he could not reach it when driving so as never to be tempted to touch it when he shouldn't. I do the same. It is set to be quiet enough not to be a nagging distraction if I have to change my route at a point when I can't stop straight away to turn it off.

[Flinders]

Many people use, or even rely on their phones for work. A company-issued mobile phone makes employees available 24-7 and many bosses expect their employees to either answer, or call back in a few minutes. I have had bosses contradict company policy about in-car phone use by implication, if not direct order. What can an employee do about something like that? Even whistlblower policies can't help there. Often only the boss and employee know what has occurred. A complaint or refusal to comply could very well mean someone losing their job.

Banning someone in that situation, even if it is feasible (the company may own the mobile phone & contract) may lead to job loss, anyway. IMO, there should be some penalty on companies that require that kind of phone vigilance. They all have policies that at least pay lip service to safety, so it may be difficult to get at that sort of cultural problem.

In France I gather they are bringing in legislation that will ban employers from contacting their staff out of normal working hours except in emergencies. Sounds like a great idea, good for family life and reducing stress by making time off really time off. Maybe the idea could go EU wide?- oh, but apparently we don't like being told what to do by the EU, we'd rather our own lords and masters did that to us 24/7..........................

[Flinders]

... I sense we are agreeing?

It would be good to think so. I try to set out my arguments - and any supporting evidence when they are more than opinions - at some length so there's less chance of being misunderstood. My embarrassingly high post count includes a high word count.

OTOH your posts are well-informed and thoughtful, and therefore worth reading, as opposed to (not always even shorter) posts you see all over t'internet which sound like the evidence-free, 'post truth', half-baked prejudices of a half-cut bloke down the pub.
Luckily we don't get much of the latter here.

I'd rather read a good long post than a fact-free short one any day.

[Cyril Haearn]

Disclosure: I have my phone set to read out message and missed call notifications while I'm driving. I then either act on the information (changed appointment location or whatever), pull over and stop in a safe place to return an urgent message, or wait until my next scheduled stop and deal with it then. I don't need to look at or touch my phone while driving to do this. I don't think hands-free calling while driving is safe enough, either - as others have suggested, the law is lagging behind current research evidence on that.

I also feel that satnavs and dashcams should have to have detailed controls where they cannot be reached from the normal driving position, too. Maybe OK and cancel buttons on the wheel or similar, like how car stereos often have a "dismiss traffic alert" button on the wheel (handy for those times atmospheric skip and/or strange transmitter service areas brings you someone waffling about roads 150 miles away which you really don't need to hear), but entering new addresses and stuff should be made impossible while driving.

Your notification system seems sensible. I don't answer my mobile if it rings when I am driving. I get off the road and find a safe place to park, and then check any message in case it is urgent (I have elderly relatives in poor health). A system like yours would be much better for me, as I would be able to decide if it was necessary to change my route immediately, find somewhere to stop to answer it, or ignore it.
In fact, I rarely give anyone my mobile number, and I tell them the condition of having it is they must never to use it except by prior arrangement (if I am meeting them) or in an emergency when they must always use the landline first, so I just about never get calls when driving anyway- and that's the way I like it.
I do tear people off a strip if they use it outside those conditions. Basically, if 'm not out and about, I may not check it for a week. Tell people that and they do tend not to use it unless it is essential. :twisted:

Hands free or not, I will not talk to anyone on their mobile either if I find they are driving- I end the call. I don't want to be responsible for distracting them.

When I finally got a satnav just recently, my brother helped me set it up. He told me he placed his where he could not reach it when driving so as never to be tempted to touch it when he shouldn't. I do the same. It is set to be quiet enough not to be a nagging distraction if I have to change my route at a point when I can't stop straight away to turn it off.

Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? To create a distance or buffer zone.

Leaving the phone on as described by these two is dangerously close to using it.

Please switch the bloody thing off before going to the vehicle.

[thirdcrank]

... Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? ...

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

[Warin61]

... Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? ...

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

I think that is 'just' a safety slogan.
"Engine on = phone off" As a slogan I think it is a good one.

Applies to any kind of engine ... chain saw, lawn mower etc.

-----------------------------
Most places in Australia forbid the use of a phone even when stopped at traffic lights ... you have to pull out of the traffic (parked) to be able to use the phone. Unless you go 'hands free' .. if 'hands free' then your ok. (The reason for 'most places' is that I am not across all the places ... it could be all of Australia.)

[Cyril Haearn]

... Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? ...

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

I think that is 'just' a safety slogan.
"Engine on = phone off" As a slogan I think it is a good one.

Applies to any kind of engine ... chain saw, lawn mower etc.

Nearly right.. first phone off, then engine on

[Warin61]

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

I think that is 'just' a safety slogan.
"Engine on = phone off" As a slogan I think it is a good one.

Applies to any kind of engine ... chain saw, lawn mower etc.

Nearly right.. first phone off, then engine on

Yes .. well we could argue about the triviality of order ...
It could be;
enter vehicle
seatbelt on
parking brake on
phone off
check mirrors and fittings for comfort and fit
check gearbox neutral selected
ignition on
check safety lights - oil pressure and alternator red
engine on
check safety lights - oil pressure and alternator off

etc..

[meic]

Very few of us actually read the relevant RTA but when the law was first publicised and in every thing that I have seen since, it was always the case that it applied at any time you were at the wheel with the engine turned on.

[Flinders]

AFAIK you are not obliged to turn the phone off. You just are not allowed to make/take a call it unless it is hands free. As I don't do either unless I am parked with the engine switched off (and never have even before the law on mobile phones), if that's breaking the law, do point me to the relevant legislation that says so.

I am in no 'danger' of answering it, as I'm not a idiot, and I resent you suggesting otherwise. Your suggestion that I am in any danger of using it as as illogical as saying that I am in danger of committing murder because I have a breadknife on the table rather than in the drawer, it's ridiculous.

I must say this site is getting as unpleasant as so many others these days, full of pointless carping and spite. I think I'll leave you all to it, as I do have more pleasant things to do than put up with it.
Enjoy yourselves.

[thirdcrank]

I had a reason for asking and only meic seems to have seen what I was getting at. The point is that when it comes to enforcement, it's the wording of the legislation - which in turn is subject to legal interpretation - which matters. I inquired about a link as a way of avoiding searching myself; I tend to assume that if somebody posts in definitive terms about the law, they are basing it on knowledge. I could, of course, search for the legislation myself but the problem is that if you google with anything other than the exact title of the relevant legislation, the first 20 pages of hits are all for law firms offering to get you off or motoring forums explaining how they can't touch you for it. I presume that this is to be found somewhere in the con and use regs, but they are not readily available online in a single form.

This offence has been compared with drink driving and in that area of offending, you don't stop being a driver just by turning off the ignition.

==================================================================================
While I've been typing this, I have googled and I find that the RTA 1988 has been amended (Sec 41D) to include both offences ie not being in proper control and specifically using a hand-held phone.

41D Breach of requirements as to control of vehicle, mobile telephones etc.
A person who contravenes or fails to comply with a construction and use requirement—
(a) as to not driving a motor vehicle in a position which does not give proper control or a full view of the road and traffic ahead, or not causing or permitting the driving of a motor vehicle by another person in such a position, or

(b) as to not driving or supervising the driving of a motor vehicle while using a hand-held mobile telephone or other hand-held interactive communication device, or not causing or permitting the driving of a motor vehicle by another person using such a telephone or other device,
is guilty of an offence.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41D

Obviously, interpretation of that involves reference to the relevant con & use regs but on the face of it the specific mobile phone offence at (b) refers only to using while driving, and it doesn't require evidence of "not having proper control." This has all developed since I retired (no almost twenty years ago ) so I cannot rely on experience, other than some understanding of how statutes are interpreted.

[thirdcrank]

To try to give an idea of what I was getting at above, here's something that sets it out simply from one of the many legal firms advertising their services.

(RE s 41A)

There is no definition of “proper control” and this is an area of much legal debate.
The more general view is that a driver could only be deemed to not be in a position to be in proper control if there is some evidence of poor driving such as swerving or weaving but this has yet to tested in the higher courts as most drivers are fearful of the costs of appeal or case stated.
Our view is that each case will depend on the circumstances sometimes eating , drinking and other activities will result in a driver not being in a position to maintain proper control whilst others will not.  There are many activities that a driver may undertake as part of routine driving which involves taking one hand off the steering wheel ie changing gear, this would not breach the legislation so if that follows there are many activities ie taking a bite of chocolate, picking a sweet up or eating an apple.
There has to be a question of degree so far example reading a map on the steering wheel probably would be in breach because you would not have full view of the road by looking at the map.  If there is evidence of swerving or weaving this may suggest a lack of control but evidence of good control has to support the argument that the driver is a position to maintain proper control.

(Re s41B)

The police must prove that you were using the phone at the time you were driving and it is not necessary for them to prove that your driving was affected. ...
There are a number of possible defences to the offences such as

you were not driving the vehicle at the time
you were not using the device at the time of driving
you were responding to an genuine emergency and it was unsafe or impracticable to stop

The offence can relate to any form of telecommunication electronic device such as a personal computer or satellite navigation system.

http://www.roadtrafficdefencelawyers.co ... l-vehicle/

[MikeF]

... Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? ...

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

I think if the engine is running you are technically driving.

[Cyril Haearn]

AFAIK you are not obliged to turn the phone off. You just are not allowed to make/take a call it unless it is hands free. As I don't do either unless I am parked with the engine switched off (and never have even before the law on mobile phones), if that's breaking the law, do point me to the relevant legislation that says so.

I am in no 'danger' of answering it, as I'm not a idiot, and I resent you suggesting otherwise. Your suggestion that I am in any danger of using it as as illogical as saying that I am in danger of committing murder because I have a breadknife on the table rather than in the drawer, it's ridiculous.

..

Many crimes of violence are committed in the heat of the moment, often by quite normal harmless people. The BMA suggested a few years ago that long pointed knives be banned, seems a good idea to me, a bread knife does not need a a sharp point.

While driving one should take a break every couple of hours. The phone may be checked then. If it is on there is indeed a chance that one would answer it without thinking. I really try to discipline myself when driving but still make mistakes, for example changing down into fourth and not changing back to fifth as soon as possible.

** "I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death [not quite that far] your right to say it"

[irc]

... Why does the law forbid using an phone while the engine is running? ...

I'm not sure where this crept in but I wasn't aware that the relevant legislation included that provision. Is there a link?

I think if the engine is running you are technically driving.

It's the law you are talking about. Years ago I got a mark in an exam for knowing that legally you were driving while filling your car with petrol. The other choices being in charge of or attempting to drive.

To know the answer you had to know a stated case where a court had found a driver was driving in those circumstances.

In the absence of a court decision I'd say in the car, engine running was in charge of the car. But as I said it's the law and I could be wrong. DEpending on court cases in recent years.