The government is reportedly planning to double the fine for motorists caught illegally using a hand-held mobile phone at the wheel to £200 due to concerns over the number of collisions attributable to use of the devices – although a road safety expert says that the focus should instead be on enforcing existing rules.
According to Mail Online, motorists found guilty of the offence, which could also be extended to wearable technology such as the Apple Watch, could also have their driving licences endorsed with six penalty points.
The current penalty of a £100 fine and three penalty points was introduced three years ago, replacing the previous fine of £60.
Studies into the use of hand-held mobile phones to make calls, surf the internet or check email or social media sites at the wheel suggest it is more dangerous than driving while under the influence of drink or drugs.
In 2012, distracted drivers were responsible for 88 deaths on Britain’s roads, with mobile phone use involved in 17 of those fatalities.
Last week, a Scottish court convicted Julie Watson of causing the death by dangerous driving of cyclist Alistair Speed.
Watson, who will be sentenced next month, was found to have deleted the record of a phone call she made prior to the fatal collision on the A91 near Gateside in Fife, in September 2013.
A survey from road safety charity IAM earlier this month found people urging more money to be spent on road traffic policing, with drivers using mobile phones illegally their top concern.
Transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin has warned drivers breaking the law that they could face tougher penalties.
“The number of casualties has been absolutely appalling,” he said last year. “We’ve got to change this. We’ve got to get that message across.
“The person who is using their phone doesn’t realise the damage or the danger that they could be in, so it ends up ruining different people’s lives.”
But Professor Stephen Glaister from the RAC Foundation has warned that stiffer penalties are meaningless if not accompanied by enforcement, since drivers do not believe they will be caught.
“The issue is less the size of the penalty and more the level of enforcement,” he warned. “The message seems clear: drivers believe they won’t be caught.”
A spokesman for the Department for Transport told Mail Online: “It’s illegal and dangerous for someone to use their phone for any reason while driving.
“To deter drivers from irresponsible behaviour, we introduced tougher penalties in 2013 and keep further measures under consideration.”
46 thoughts on “Fines for illegal mobile phone use at wheel set to double to £200?”
It’s the thing i worry about
It’s the thing i worry about most when cycling – a texter or a caller driving into me, irrespective of ‘taking the road’. Peripheral vision you can see out there is sometimes non-existent. It’s only a matter of time before it affects cyclists so the harder the punishment the better i think, in this case.
i also think they should be
i also think they should be banned from driving for a year. It’s horrendously dangerous driving whilst on the phone and should be discouraged with zero tolerance.
“Studies suggest it is more
“Studies suggest it is more dangerous than driving while under the influence of drink or drugs.”
So why are we not looking at a twelve month ban?
MervO wrote:”Studies suggest
Yes indeed, a 12 month ban would be more appropriate, plus a compulsory retest. I was on my way to work this morning and stopped to let a woman use the pedestrian crossing on my route. Behind me I heard a screech of tyres and saw the woman’s look of horror before looking round. A 4×4 had swerved into the kerb to avoid ramming me into the woman. And yes, the driver was on the phone.
When I suggested he should pay more attention to the road (and minding what I was saying), he was curiously dismissive, using some choice language.
2012, distracted drivers were
Yeah, and the rest, this should read 88 drivers admitted to being distracted.
£200 fine? Pointless, especially for the rich. Automatic driving ban 3 months for the first offence, jail or suspended sentence for the 2nd + car(s) confiscated permanently.
I believe an e-petition with
I believe an e-petition with 100,000 signatures has to be discussed in parliament. Halfords alone sold 1.3 million bikes last year. There are enough cyclists to go way past the required figure.
How about a campaign to introduce a twelve month ban?
Arrest the car and crush the
Arrest the car and crush the driver.
Do it the Swiss way where
Do it the Swiss way where fines are linked to the ability to pay. A few £10k or £100k fines in the headlines. A few bankruptcies, evictions etc.
…oh who are we kidding people? Nothing’s going to change. They’ve sacked 17,000 cops. Everyone knows the chances of being caught doing anything wrong are lower now than ever. And like the article alludes to, it’ll take legislation half a decade to catch up with the fact you can do more now on your watch than you could on a handset 3 years ago.
Hate to voice this, but the only way real change is going to happen is when a politician and possibly family are ploughed into and killed by a texting driver. On bikes, on foot – doesn’t matter. It will have to be someone seriously high-up, close to Cameron, with lots of small children and women involved, maybe with HD footage to blur out the nasty bits. Maybe a minor royal will do.
Then, maybe, just maybe, the DfT will feel it can get meaningful legislation passed without No.10 backing down in the face of red-tops defending the hard-working tax-paying motorist.
Yes yes it’s terrible to wish death on someone as-yet unidentified as a means to an end, but frankly I see no alternative. What we have right now is a dozen or more dead each year, every year, and god knows how many maimed, specifically because of mobiles. The legislative and enforcement tools are there, there’s just currently no political will to wield them.
Fines are already based on
Fines are already based on your income with an upper limit
I agree with Professor
I agree with Professor Stephen Glaister. It isn’t the amount of money that drivers could be fined that’s the problem, it’s the fact that they don’t believe they’ll be caught – and they’re right.
When I walk around town, I regularly see drivers messing around with their phones. The police could walk around and catch them – but they don’t.
a few months back West Mercia
a few months back West Mercia had some spot checks on the A46 near Evesham, the change in driver behaviour whilst the police were there was enormous, everytime a camera van is parked on the Sedgeberrow bypass the drivers behave in a very different way.
Money and fines really aren’t the answer, just make drivers believe they will get caught.
Coming back from a nice ride
Coming back from a nice ride in Regent’s Park late this morning, my missus and I stopped in the first ASL box coming back towards Camden’s parkway road, as traffic lights changed to red.
Hear an engine noise, I look over my shoulder to see a women driving a large black 4 x 4 straight at us, holding a mobile phone in front of her face, she had not noticed the traffic lights (or us!).
I shouted very loudly, she seemed to jump and jammed on the brakes before she drove into us. Another cyclist next to us was shocked at her behaviour and started giving her a good dressing down, the driver looked embarassed, perhaps that she had been caught using her phone?
Regarding announcements of fines, it makes absolutely no difference in the rear world, because the Police are no where to be seen, and motorists realized this some time ago?
You could announce you will take their driving licence away, put them in prison, crush their car, it won’t change behavior unless its actively enforced and with further cut backs to Policing, its looking less likely a motorist will get caught red-handed, unless they run someone over.
We’ve had all kinds of announcements that are not actively enforced, the 20 mph blanket speed limit we’ve had in London Borough of Camden has been widely ignored since its introduction 2+ years ago, and the local Police commander admitted in an interview with Camden New Journal newspaper that he did not have the resources to enforce it 🙁
+1 for proper enforcement –
+1 for proper enforcement – everyone knows mobile use is illegal and dangerous but plenty carry on using them anyway… there’s an arrogant belief they won’t get caught – sadly reinforced by minimal Police on the roads…
At least this gets it out in the media and helps to raise it in the national conversation – making it socially unacceptable will go a long way to reducing it
What is the advice these days
What is the advice these days on stepping in to prevent a crime in progress?
I’ll make a guess. It it’s a mugging, hailed a hero. If it’s the aforementioned dozy cow tweeting at the wheel of her 4×4, arrest for assault.
I wish I was brave enough to try. I could make a citizens arrest of 30% of the drivers at the Fenchurch St/Gracechurch St lights. They don’t like it at the moment when I shout at them. Btw, this is as a pedestrian dressed in a suit.
So £100 stops approximately
So £100 stops approximately no-one driving and texting. So by my calculations, this measure will stop an additional … gets out calculator … presses a few buttons … er … no-one.
This one is easily solved.
This one is easily solved. The punishment should be confiscation of the users phone.
its not the size of the
its not the size of the penalty that is a deterrent, its the probability of getting caught, currently near 0, unless you hit someone, where it goes to about 50/50
Last night I saw a motorist
Last night I saw a motorist driving the other way with their hand resting on top of the wheel, mobile between them. Driving into the glaring sunset. You’d have no chance if you were in front of them. It’s terrifying.
vonhelmet wrote:Last night I
Perfect excuse for the driver then, low sun blinding people !
As said before should be a ban if caught, I would say 3 months if not caused an accident, 24months if caused an accident.
Just shoot the fuckers.
Just shoot the fuckers.
Okay so now I have to pay a
Okay so now I have to pay a whopping £200 if I happen to be caught using my £800 mobile phone in my £75,000 Range Rover. Damn, I better stop nearly killing other vulnerable road users.
A series of TV adverts may
A series of TV adverts may help. At one time driving under the influence was largely accepted, as it was in the US when I was working there a few years ago. Drivers who were caught, were considered unlucky. The practice needs to be seen as unacceptable, which currently it is not.
leaway2 wrote:A series of TV
I think this is the solution to make it as socially unacceptable as drink driving or driving a car without a seatbelt. In the 80’s all the adverts on tv seemed to be about one or the other. People still do both but it is a minority.
Dear gods, it’s really not
Dear gods, it’s really not hard. Fit all cars with mobile phone jammers, make removal or tampering punishable by banning and crushing (the car I suppose, but the driver would be nice). Stop worrying about ”but then the passenger can’t make phone calls” and other such pish.
Fines based on the value of
Fines based on the value of the car. Driving a 60k range rover? That’ll cost you. If you’re on a low income and you’ve spent all your money on your pride and joy, treat the laws with respect or it’ll cost you.
If you’re a footballer in a ferrari I’ll get a new hospital each time you get caught using your phone.
People are too precious about what should just be one means of getting from A to B. Do this and either people would start worrying about the punishment or we’d see a lot less stupidly high performance cars on the road.
And if you kill due to using
And if you kill due to using a phone whilst driving, then that should be a manslaughter offence as well as a driving offence.
@stevie63
education through
@stevie63
education through advertising to change social attitudes toward cell phone / tablet driving is very important, and probably the best solution
we could also do with a similar campaign around ASL use, as very few motorists or motorcyclists seem to know the law, or actually care about it
as was done with seat belt and drink driving campaigns
I do believe when the law was introduced about cell phone use, it got better for a short while, until the smart phone became prevalent which people seem to find very addictive, combined with a shift from road traffic policing to anti-terrorism policing, now to cut backs in all policing numbers
hampstead_bandit wrote:we
Seconded. Pretty much every time I stop in an ASL some huge motorcycle pulls up next to me. Maybe they think, “Well, we’ve both got two wheels…”? They don’t seem to realise that the ASL is to keep me away from them as well as all the four wheeled vehicles.
brooksby
I appreciate that motorcyclists are vulnerable in traffic, just like cyclists. what I never appreciate is when they endanger my safety when I have positioned myself safely in an ASL to make myself very visible to motorists waiting behind me, and then a motorcyclists pulls into the ASL, compromising my position.
It’s got to the point where I politely yet directly ask them what they are doing in the ASL, which unfortunately is met with the response of a swear word or just ignorance that they have done anything wrong.
hampstead_bandit
I appreciate that motorcyclists are vulnerable in traffic, just like cyclists. what I never appreciate is when they endanger my safety when I have positioned myself safely in an ASL to make myself very visible to motorists waiting behind me, and then a motorcyclists pulls into the ASL, compromising my position.
It’s got to the point where I politely yet directly ask them what they are doing in the ASL, which unfortunately is met with the response of a swear word or just ignorance that they have done anything wrong.— hampstead_bandit
Back to that entitlement thing again. When was the last time anyone actually received an apology from an errant driver? Must be decades ago for me. Yet I know I used to. Nowadays it seems that admission of error is impossible for people. Threatening the victim for calling out the error seems to the done thing now.
brooksby
I think on balance that if there was room for whatever pushbikes wanted to use the ASL, i’d prefer the motorcycle to pull alongside and get off in front of me. That way they are visible at all times to me and not over-taking (sensibly, one hopes) from behind. They’re going to be long gone before the cars crawl past anyway, so let ’em go I say. Clearly this also involves the ‘bike rider not being a knob in some way though, so i’m not saying it’s always going to be the best situation let alone legal but that’s my personal preference.
I’m bewildered by the ASLs,
I’m bewildered by the ASLs, because I honestly wonder how anyone who hasn’t been learning to drive in the past 5-10 years or however long they’ve been around is supposed to know what on earth they’re for. So what’s the point of them, if people aren’t going to be told what they’re for? It would be like if we started using, I don’t know, urban clearway signs all of a sudden without them ever having been used before. The sign gives away nothing of what it’s for, so people would be in the dark as to what they’re for. Likewise, how are people to know what the ASL is for or how to use it?
vonhelmet wrote:I’m
Is this sarcasm? The block of coloured paint, the big pic of a bike and a solid white line don’t give it away?
kie7077 wrote:vonhelmet
No, I’m deadly serious. How is a driver supposed to know what it means? And how are they supposed to infer all the detail that is contained in the relevant sections of the highway code in terms of which lines you can cross and when? You can’t just start painting things on the roads and expect people to know what they mean.
vonhelmet wrote:kie7077
No, I’m deadly serious. How is a driver supposed to know what it means? And how are they supposed to infer all the detail that is contained in the relevant sections of the highway code in terms of which lines you can cross and when? You can’t just start painting things on the roads and expect people to know what they mean.— vonhelmet
Laws, regulations and codes change all the time – it’s up to you to keep up to date. The onus is on the driver to ensure they are familiar with the current release of the highway code. If you’ve seen a road marking that you don’t understand, and you’ve done nothing to further your understanding (i.e. read a new highway code, research the internet, ask friends etc) then you’re a tool and shouldn’t be driving.
danthomascyclist wrote:Laws,
You clearly have a lot more faith in drivers than I do. Given that we’re arguing about this in a thread about the fact that no one follows laws about mobile phones, I think it’s an absolute fantasy to think they even notice the ASL markings, let alone wonder what they’re for or make any attempt to find out.
vonhelmet wrote:kie7077
No, I’m deadly serious. How is a driver supposed to know what it means? And how are they supposed to infer all the detail that is contained in the relevant sections of the highway code in terms of which lines you can cross and when? You can’t just start painting things on the roads and expect people to know what they mean.— vonhelmet
Thanks for demonstrating why 10 yearly retests are required. If you can’t be bothered to keep your driving skills and knowledge up to date then sadly doing so will have to be enforced.
As with just about every issue in this country, the libertarian hope that people can be left to behave responsibly yet again fails. Entitlement always trumps avoidance of imposition. The outcome is always more laws, more regulations, more intrusion. And then people complain about a nanny or fascist state. Well bloody well accept responsibility yourself then!
P.S. All these strange new lines and colours in the road are bounded by white lines that follow the same rules that have been in existence since before the Highway Code was invented. Try using your little grey cells when encountering something new. Because like the saying says, there’s nothing new under the sun.
racyrich wrote:Thanks for
We do need mandatory re-testing, I agree, because once people have passed their test the quality of their driving typically drops off.
As already said numerous
As already said numerous times here and elsewhere. Poor driving by any means is about enforcement. I was crossing a dual carriageway yesterday at a set of lights from one cycle path to the other. As I approached a silver Astra was doing a ridiculous speed undertaking and weaving around traffic in a 40mph zone. He clearly didn’t think he would get caught.
I recently learnt that my county has only got two mobile speed cameras. A letter from our local councillor last year advised us they are considering a 20mph zone around the residential streets surrounding and including mine but actually had no intention of enforcing it just that ‘most’ people are law abiding. It won’t stop the morons who aren’t.
It’s the same with phones, most people don’t even realise how their phone can be left on standby and the call/text/e-mail can actually wait until they are carrying out a safer activity and those who do, know they won’t get caught.
I’m unlikely to be hit by a terrorist bomb even if the police are chasing after them and if I am then I’ll consider myself unlucky. I won’t consider myself unlucky if I get hit by an ignorant motorist.
How about the government -or
How about the government -or even better, a competent, capable organisation capable or logical thinking and public needs – fund a large media campaign. Awareness is key, it won’t stop the dregs of society, but majority of good people probably just don’t consider the impact of using these devices.
2 incidents in a short walk
2 incidents in a short walk at lunchtime today.
1. HGV driver, manifest in one hand, programming sat nav (mounted to windscreen and quite a stretch by the look of it) with the other whilst steering through a red light using his knees (presumably his knees, else credit where it’s due).
2. Lady on pushbike cycling on pavement whilst texting, small child in bucket seat on the back, wobbling to a stop when a pensioner recklessly exited a shop doorway.
Mobile phones are endemic! Why are there any number of traffic wardens available to persecute the crime of overstaying a ticket by a few minutes, but not enough resources to film, prosecute and otherwise make life bloody miserable for drivers who cannot put their phones down or go to the expense of a hands free kit?
This morning I was nearly
This morning I was nearly killed by a HGV snaking across the inside lane of Oldham road, when I got in front of him at a set of lights and knocked on his window he finally looked up and put the ipad down.
He quite literally wasn’t looking where he was going despite being in charge of a few tonnes of metal, in rush hour. This is just one of many incidents I see every day, there needs to be more traffic police otherwise the fine is irrelevant.
Another piece of lip service
Another piece of lip service to be used for an annual purge & then forgotten. What more can I say X(
And the double of nothing
And the double of nothing is………..
I’d probably be happy with
I’d probably be happy with the current penalties …if they were enforced.
Nothing will change. The
Nothing will change. The situation will only become worse. Politicians, most plods and courts DGAF. It’s an occupational hazard of life. As a result a few people get killed everyday, so what. The cost of everyday life. However if some one comes down with SARS, bird flu or indeed there is an ebola outbreak there is panic. In the last 10 years approx 25,000 people have lost their lives on UK roads not to mention the tens and tens of thousands who have been seriously injured with life changing injuries.
Then there are the fuckers who film accident scenes as they drive by as what happened on the A14 last week and the cops are now prosecuting them. Good.
The UK is a shit and dangerous place to ride a bicycle.
The risks will continue and grow. The slaughter will continue.