Mobile New Penilties

[TWR]

Have they gone far enough with the 6Pints + £200 fine? my view for what's it worth, 1 Year Ban, £1000,

[Zacs-Master]

Are the 6 pints to soften the blow of the fine?

On a more serious note..... I don't think it goes far enough as a deterrent.

[Old_Geezer]

Massive vindictive penalties for a few that are caught is not the way to go. More vigilance and education is better. And I hope they don't sup the pints then get straight back on the road ;-)

[New Judge]

“I think the fine should be higher.”

You have to bear in mind, ummm, that the £200 quoted in the press is the new “Fixed Penalty” fine. (As a comparison, the fixed penalty fine for speeding is £100). Drivers whose cases are heard in court (those who face disqualification under the totting-up rules, where there are aggravating features or those who dispute the offence and plead Not Guilty) face a fine of a week and a half’s net income (reduced by a third for a guilty plea). So unless a driver has a particularly low income he faces a far higher fine in court.

Some studies have suggested that using a mobile phone (even hands-free) diverts so much concentration away from driving that it is as bad as driving with excess alcohol. If that is indeed the case there is an argument for a mandatory disqualification for mobile phone use. The problem is that this would require a court appearance for every mobile phone offence and fixed penalties are currently being handed out at the rate of more than 2,000 per week (and this excludes those caught who are offered courses instead of penalties). But, of course, the fact that the courts may not be able to deal with the business is no reason to refuse to consider harsher penalties.

[Bazile]

I may be wrong , however i beleive that drivers only get caught when police are out and about on other business or when they have one off specific day of looking out for offenders .

What should happen is that forces should have regular periods when thay are specifically looking for offenders .
The fines from offenders should be ringfenced and used towards funding the costs of such operations

[youngmafbog]

Yes, the only way to get this down is for plod to have enforcement drives like they do with alcohol. The cost of this should be covered by the reduction in accidents that cost the emergency services a fortune.

[Baldric]

///and this excludes those caught who are offered courses instead of penalties///

According to an Officer on the BBC News at lunchtime, there are to be no courses offered under the new rules.

[hereIam]

When I was out shopping the other day, I saw a bloke on a mobile 'phone in his car. I glared at him and mouthed 'put your 'phone away' and to my utter amazement he did and loked suitably chastened !! I think £1,000 fine would be better.

[murraymints]

I am always shaking head and pointing to phones at other drivers

[B00]

It's obviously going well...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4271246/Drivers-caught-using-mobile-phones-wheel-again.html

[hereIam]

That's why it needs to be a lot more than £200 BOO, but some selfish prats will always try it on !

[youngmafbog]

It never seems difficult for the Paps to get plenty of shots of them so plod need to get more active.

[TWR]

Many a time when I was driving HGVs having the firm phone me up, How Long, What Time, Where Are you Question's, I'm not condoning Drivers for using the Mobile On board Phones, but my view regards HGV drivers, if caught the phone should be checked & if found that the Driver received a call from their company, it's the company that should be fined and not the driver, as they are putting the driver in a difficult position, & I will repeat, putting the Driver in a Difficult postion.

[hc4361]

TWR, all professional drivers should have hands free phones - there is no excuse. These days the bosses know exactly where the driver is and in which direction he is going.

[Baldric]

///if caught the phone should be checked & if found that the Driver received a call from their company, it's the company that should be fined and not the driver///

Drivel, the driver should be aware of the Law, it goes with the job, if he's daft enough to answer on a handheld 'phone he should be treated the same as a car driver.
You can't have 2 different sets of rules.

[TWR]

For people that don't know what the job entails, you don't know much.

[hc4361]

TWR, I know enough about the job and I wouldn't do it again for all the tea in China.
The fact remains that there is absolutely no excuse for a professional driver to use a hand held whilst driving. It is highly dangerous and very stupid.

[Mamyalynne]

Only urgent messages should be sent to the drivers via a hands free set up - all non urgent instructions can be sent via text to be read at the next break in the journey.

Companies and drivers should have equal regard for the law.

[Baldric]

How would you justify an HGV Driver using a handheld 'phone being let off, they should, given the size of the vehicle they're driving been given a bigger penalty. In fact I believe I've read somewhere that that is the case.
FYI, after leaving The RMs, I worked in Freight Forwarding for a number of years doing many trips to the Continent with various Companies Drivers to sort problems and set things up.
Oh yeah, I nearly forgot, The RMs trained me so that I obtained a HGV Licence.

[New Judge]

“According to an Officer on the BBC News at lunchtime, there are to be no courses offered under the new rules.”

That’s not surprising, Balders. Offences attracting a minimum of six points don’t usually have a course option. I was just trying to provide a feel for how many mobile phone offences are currently being detected.

As far as HGV drivers are concerned many police forces do not offer fixed penalties for mobile phone offences involving HGVs. They issue a court summons instead where, as I explained, the penalties are considerably higher.

[Baldric]

As they should be NJ.