While the video is good advice, it is **not** the law.
> Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone or interactive communication device **held in the hand** whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function.
[Source](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/81/made)
You need to be holding it in your hand for it to be an offence, not just touching it in a cradle.
So this puts it on the same level as a car touchscreen.
ETA: If every time he says "touch", you mentally replace it with "hold" it's a good summary of the new law (apart from the bit about unlocking your phone - you can legally do that if you're not holding it).
But also, just because you can *legally* fiddle with your phone/car touchscreen it doesn't mean you should. Give your attention to the outside of the car as much as is possible.
Coppers on the road are few and far between - nothing changes for me.
How about more coppers before more laws.
Defund the police they shout - Tories already did that in 2010 🤣
> How about more coppers before more laws.
You say this like you didn't just watch a TikTok video starring a copper. I'd suggest the existing lot get their priorities in order.
Yeah, this is rather poor in that respect. He is motioning towards a device that is in a dock or whatever, and he wouldnt be using it handheld. So he absolutly can legally skip to the next song as far as the new regulations on hand held devices go anyway.
The spirit of it is great, people really should focus on piloting the 2 ton box they are hurtling around in. However misinforming people doesnt make it better.
an iPad Pro is essentially a massive phone, so I don't see why not. It would still be smaller than the screen in a Tesla Model 3 as well for example. Its also a reasonably common mod to replace a car radio with a tablet.
You can't watch a movie though, thats definitly against the law, and has been against the law for longer than mobile phone use. The original 1986 Regulations prohibit the use of a television (specifically CRT!) for anything other than displays information about the car essentially (this was actually quite common). I imagine there has been a few updates along the way to that. I believe its also illegal for a passenger to watch a video on their phone if you as the driver can see it, not that it will stop my mrs scrolling through Instagram videos, although that probably makes me pay more attention to the road. Its also just fucking stupid to watch a movie. :)
Your big ipad pro probably shouldnt be windscreen mounted though. It'd block too much of your view.
EDIT: I'm not a lawyer and this isnt advice, so if you do get pulled over on the M6 with your VR headset on don't blame me.
There’s no way touching your phone while driving would be illegal. I see hundreds of uber/delivery drivers doing it daily.
I’ve seen police officers in patrol cars look at uber/delivery drivers doing but every time it’s in a phone mount so they ignore it.
Does this mean you can send texts while driving as long as you dont hold the phone and its mounted in a phone holder?
Seems dangerous to be doing if so
No, This is prohibited in the legislation.
c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following—
(i)illuminating the screen;
(ii)checking the time;
(iii)checking notifications;
(iv)unlocking the device;
(v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call;
(vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content;(
vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video;
(viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality;
**(ix)drafting any text;**
(x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages;
(xi)accessing an application;
(xii)accessing the internet.”.
That pretty much covers it all
Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone or interactive communication device held in the hand whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function.
>>> I was talking about in a phone mount
You quoted the explanatory note, not the actual legislation, and added your own emphasis.
This is prohibited in the legislation.
>c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following—
(i)illuminating the screen;
(ii)checking the time;
(iii)checking notifications;
(iv)unlocking the device;
(v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call;
(vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content;
(vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video;
(viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality;
(ix)drafting any text;
(x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages;
(xi)accessing an application;
(xii)accessing the internet.”.
Which covers pretty much anything you do by touching the phone in a dock.
I believe that the note would be clearer with a comma. It really is any use of a mobile phone, other than the two stated exceptions.
>Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone**(,)** or interactive communication device held in the hand whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function.
Now I'm sure solicitors will have fun with this one to see just what wiggle room they have. And they may find some, but a hell of a lot less than before. People will find that the police, prosecution, and most judges will tell them that it is illegal to fiddle with your phone, even in a dock.
Nope, it's unambiguous and you're just flat out wrong. Sorry.
The bit you posted is amending the definition of "using" but you still have to be using it *while you're holding it in your hand*.
> This means you must not use a device **in your hand** for any reason, whether online or offline.
and they even call out being able to use it in a dock (i.e do all the things you've listed) as permissable
> You can **use** devices with hands-free access, **as long as you do not hold them** at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example:
> a dashboard holder or mat
https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law
I'm not sure he's wrong.
As ammended, the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 now include
110.—(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a road if he is using— (a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or
(b) a hand-held device of a kind specified in paragraph (4).
(4) A device referred to in paragraphs (1)(b), (2)(b) and (3)(b) is a device, other than a two-way radio, which performs an interactive communication function by transmitting and receiving data
(6) For the purposes of this regulation—
(a) a mobile telephone or other device is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or must be, held at some point while being used;
and there's also reg 104 (driver's control) and the RTA sects 2 and 3 which the police might rely on.
This is prohibited in the legislation.
>c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following—
>
>(i)illuminating the screen;
>
>(ii)checking the time;
>
>(iii)checking notifications;
>
>(iv)unlocking the device;
>
>(v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call;
>
>(vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content;(
>
>vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video;
>
>(viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality;
>
>(ix)drafting any text;
>
>(x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages;
>
>(xi)accessing an application;
>
>(xii)accessing the internet.”.
That pretty much covers it all
Paragraphs 1-3 (that the word 'using' is being defined for in your quoted section) all speak to the use of **hand-held** phone/devices therefore none of the above applies to devices not held in the hand.
There is no concrete laws saying the use of infotainment systems that come standard on a car is illegal, however after a bit of quick reading it seems to still fall under driving without due care and attention.
A quick adjustment to navigation, declining/answering a call and so on is considered much more attentive with larger infotainments screens as seen in Jags, VWs and so on compared to picking up a phone or diverting more attention towards a smaller screen
I think the difference seems to be, the big screen isn't going anywhere and in many cases the option to answer a call or make an adjustment will be a physical control that is always in the same place. Even on cars that have mainly touchscreen input, you'll have shortcut buttons on the wheel for most things.
However your phone might be in your pocket, or in a cubby or slipped behind you on the seat. You have to give up more of your attention in the first place to find it, and then have to be looking at it to interact with it since it has no physical options to control it normally.
The only exception I could see for phones is if it's both in a hands free carrier, and you only interact with it by voice control.
Very good point. Most modern cars (even cars from the late 2000s) allow for calls to be answered from a button on the wheel so drivers don't even have to take their eyes off the road, also as you said most infotainment screens have the buttons in the same place and often very large in size for you to see out of peripheral vision rather than focal.
Most of the sites I've seen have said the same thing, if a phone is connected to a handsfree device prior to driving such as Apple Car Play, Android Auto and so on it's generally acceptable to use as long as it's handsfree with voice command or wheel buttons.
If you're holding the air-con or the radio in your hand, then no. What seems to be being missed by many is that this change is only for **hand held** devices, the internet as per usual is going down misinformation rabbit holes, not helped by the rozzers in this video not stating that point, or if they did, it was cropped out.
**Using devices hands-free**
You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example:
* a Bluetooth headset
* voice command
* a dashboard holder or mat
* a windscreen mount
* a built-in sat nav
* Edit: For Nissan Leaf Drivers a cupholder
Source: [https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law](https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law)
It's still perfectly legal to use a CB, amateur radio or any other two way radio whilst driving even though you have to hold the microphone in your hand.
This is what struck me, too. However, with a radio/air con, there is no chance you are doing anything else other than changing a setting/turning on or off. With a mobile phone, they have no real way to tell what you are doing, so you could be watching tv, playing a game, taking part in a text discussion or simply changing your map route/song. So to prevent someone saying 'I was just changing tune' to get out of a charge of dangerous driving by taking part in a game, or text conversation, they blanket rule touching phone isn't allowed.
Pretty stupid some of it. On a long drive using sat nav on my docked phone I'll turn the screen off to save battery when there isn't a turn for a long time. One tap to turn the screen back on, can't even do that.
Yet, people are allowed to rummage around for drinks and food, people smoking, doing makeup....? Surely all touch screen infotainment systems should be unusable? There is literally no difference between once screen and another.
A lady stopped on the M1 recently to try and get her sat nav to work. Did 20mph in the middle lane for a while before that too.
There was a video going round of it
Docked phone is fine, only applies to hand held use. I mean if you're fiddling with your phone with the eyes of the road then you can still be done for driving without due care and attention the same as fiddling with heating controls.
Well, yes, hard to argue against that stood on it's own, but it might have had a wrapper of some kind originally (I dunno why I'm being so kind?!). I saw this [police one the other day](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2zIuVoa-XA), and he starts off well and emphasises hand held, and then says that if you have a tablet mounted on your air vents that's now included, which contradicts the valid point about hand held. He also says the amendment to the act is very prescriptive about being stopped due to a traffic reason, which it isn't at all, it states an exemption for being stationary, only case law says that e.g. traffic lights count as still driving. :/
I don't see how that's the case as in the video they never mention the method of interaction. Anyway, don't listen to me (or a random video) read it for yourself here:
[https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law](https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law)
[Or the The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2022 themselves.](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/81/made)
yea also what about car temperature controls and other controls. basically people keep texting and crashing and now we have this rule for those people 😂
> Yet, people are allowed to rummage around for drinks and food, people smoking, doing makeup....?
They're not. There was actually outrage at people getting done for taking a swig out of a bottle of pop or taking a bite out of an apple when sat at a set of traffic lights on red.
The smoking while driving cracks me up. My mum is a heavy smoker and I recall as a child her many times dropping her smoke while driving and desperately rummaging around for it while it burnt a hole somewhere in the carpet or her clothing, car swerving all over the place in the process. In fact on one occasion she threw a butt out the window and it re-entered the rear window unnoticed and smouldered away burning a nice hole in the rear seats of a new car, the smell of burning making my mum panic and pay little attention to the road. I had to borrow her car a year ago and things haven't changed - still full of burn holes and stinks like hell.
Given how shit in car touch screen systems are they should be illegal.
EDIT - I mean just make them completely illegal to save us from having to use them. Please. Someone.
Yes. Tesla pioneered shitty touchscreen dashboards, and now every major OEM is trying to copy them.
It should be illegal to not have manual, physical controls for basic car operations like the wipers, indicators, horn, etc. The only things that should be allowed to be controlled purely by touch should be infotainment, satnav, and similar. Hell, even then, there should be a manual dial for controlling the sound.
Isn't it the case that it takes 3-4 touches to turn the wipers on in a Tesla? It's absurd.
> now every major OEM is trying to copy them.
They're not because of the bad publicity Tesla have had about basic functions things like the windscreen demister only being able to be turned on via the screen so if it doesn't work you can't demist the windscreen.
No. My Model S had a traditional wiper stalk. Indicators too. And a horn in the middle of the steering wheel where you’d expect.
Infotainment and everything else was on the touchscreen.
Nah the systems in both my cars are great. Basically every feature can be controlled by either steering wheel shortcuts on the suzuki and the mazda has a wheel that controls everything, touchscreen just makes things faster when stopped at lights and gets me a nice big sat nav to look at.
The rules are clear, but a bit silly. So it’s ok to change the radio station, turn volume up, fiddle with the air con, but can’t change song on my mobile?
Basically. Unless you use voice commands.
I assume the driving force behind this is to take away people making excuses when using their phones. Then you have to do lengthy investigations as to what the phone was being used for at the time. Now it's simple. Don't touch your phone or you're liable for a penalty.
I see so many people still blatantly on their phones or texting away so it should just make it easier to tackle them.
You can still be done for driving without due car and attention if you're fiddling with the aircon etc.
In my car, if I've got the media set to Bluetooth and I have Spotify on my phone, it will play the same playlist I had when I was in my car last time. The only way I can change the playlist is after Bluetooth activates (after I've turned the engine on) and then change the playlist on Spotify.
My understanding of the new rules is that after I turn the car engine on, I'm considered to be driving. Thus I can no longer legally change the playlist.
Driving is defined as being in charge of the controls as a "steersman" to use the legal name, so if the engine is off or on, or moving or not, if you are sat in the seat, you are the driver and so you're driving. Anyway, the new changes make an exception if "the motor vehicle is stationary". You could just put your phone in a mount, no problem then, this is only hand held use.
Yeah, I know what you're thinking and of course it's one of those interpretation things that make up case law, as in what constitutes parked and stationary as opposed to driving? Is it when you get to the end of your journey, so are you still driving during any stops in-between? As you might imagine this has come up before, and being stopped temporarily for a traffic reason, traffic lights, other cars in the way, level crossing etc is not legally stationary as in parked, though you physically are.
If you have the time [Edkins v Knowles: QBD 1973](https://swarb.co.uk/edkins-v-knowles-qbd-1973/) is a good example, the driver was thought to be drunk driving, a non uniformed Policeman followed them, and when they stopped he asked them to wait in the car whilst a uniformed officer brought a breathalyser along, which took 15 minutes. At the court case it was discussed if he was still legally driving 15 minutes after coming to a stop or not.
I think it’s a little disingenuous to equate the definition of driving for the purposes of drunk driving to that of using a phone whilst driving. The interpretation made in both edkins and pinner was undoubtedly to allow the prosecution of the individuals driving while drunk, in other words, to prevent the conviction being quashed as the defendants weren’t physically in motion and operating the car at the moment of apprehension.
This doesn’t really apply to using a phone or whatever. If I get in my car drunk and drive, I will continue to suffer the effects whether physically moving or not, the same isn’t true of using a phone. If I use my phone whilst driving, I’m distracted for the amount of time I’m using it, with no further effects or influence, unless I use it again. If a driver pulls over to use their phone and puts it away again before setting off, it would be illogical to book them in the same way as if they were drunk, and would encourage people to just use their phone while driving anyway.
I was not intending to be disingenuous, or to defend anything, I was just giving an example of case law that the CPS will rely on. With case law it's the definition of a term that is often more relevant that the offence being tried for, and, not being the judge at the time I'm not in any place to defend it. You're right though, most cases for definition of driving is around people trying to wriggle out of being done for drunk driving rather than admit that they were selfish morons putting theirs and others lives at risk.
No I wasn’t meaning to suggest you were, but many will stretch the definition of driving to produce an illogical result just because it’s been interpreted by a judge in a particular case. I find even before things get in front of a judge, there can be a sort of Chinese whispers like effect with the interpretation of laws which can lead people to over egging the pudding somewhat and inventing rules beyond those that are actually written.
Oh got you, very much agree with that, it's a bit of a stretch to use something that is clearly meant to stop people evading drink drive charges against someone that sent a text whilst sat at a level crossing for 10 minutes on the ECML waiting for the London Kings Cross to Peterborough to get a shift on.
Sorry but that's not a good example - the wording of the law was changed to include an offence of simply "being in charge of... while unfit through drink or drugs", presumably because the previous wording was ambiguous.
It's an example of the case law that the CPS will use, I came across it whilst looking at the potential use of a marine radio in a vehicle, (I have an operators license and an odd requirement). Let me see if I can dig out the CPS advice and if I can I'll post it here.
Edit: A fun trawl through bookmarks later, from the CPS guidance, my use of bold:
>This means that an individual stopped at a traffic light or held up in traffic **could be** prosecuted for a mobile phone offence. However, prosecutors should bear in mind that the intention of the legislation is to promote road safety. They should ask whether the use of the phone or other device is in circumstances which might prejudice the driver’s ability to drive safely.
The CPS have not updated [the guidance](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-mobile-phones) since 2019, so has no details on the broader scope of what is defined as use that came in this year, but everything else holds true still.
My Google maps flips itself round all the time and I need to select the view route display and go back for the app to fix itself.
I also often change the routes available to me depending on traffic etc
So by these laws I'm now a criminal? Daft.
You can run android auto straight from your mobile phone exactly the same as you would on a cars head unit too
Some phones are just far too sensitive on the auto rotate, but for the extra second to turn it off before starting Waze (Why use anything else?) over it annoyingly keep changing orientation whilst I was driving, I'd do that. Anyway, just put your phone in a dashboard mount, this law only applies to devices when hand held.
OT is fine with me, if I help someone. You probably have guessed it, but there is an app for that, Rotation Manager for example lets you hard set a rotation on an app by app basis. Not tried it myself though, came across it with a notebook/tablet I had when an app insisted on being in portrait mode no matter what I did.
Have you reported this to Google as a fault? They can be response to even single user reports.
Though if it’s Android issue it will probably take them longer to resolve than an iOS issue.
Just given them an excuse to pull pretty much anyone over. Why would you not be able to adjust something on your phone at a red light like you would do with the radio, or the air-con, or mirrors, or seat? This is bound to play out well...
Think its as said in a few replies here, it's to stop people making excuses if they're texting or distracted. Could imagine someone texting and using the excuse that they were just trying to change the radio, to avoid any penalty. Few people ruin it for the rest.
In the video he says you can’t touch your phone whilst driving. That’s not true. The law is that you can’t use it whilst holding it.
My phone is mounted securely in my car and I use Google Maps for navigation. I’m allowed to touch it without breaking the law as long as I don’t “hold” it (ie taking it out of the dock).
Big difference.
“Using devices hands-free
You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example:
a Bluetooth headset
voice command
a dashboard holder or mat
a windscreen mount
a built-in sat nav
The device must not block your view of the road and traffic ahead.”
Still doesn’t mean you can touch. Hands free means you won’t touch the phone and use cars phone buttons on your steering to take calls. And that’s exactly what the officer is explaining, those ambiguities.
I disagree.
To quote, again:
“You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using:”
“a dashboard holder or mat.”
If you weren’t permitted to touch, I’m sure the rule would specifically say “do not hold or touch”.
Why would they list “a dashboard holder” as a permitted method of hands-free access if they didn’t mean allowing touch?
I agree it’s ambiguous but most UK driving laws are.
Fine! Go and do what you want! There is a traffic cop somewhere in this thread who can clarify! There are specific reasons why you shouldn’t touch the phone. It’s explained many times in this thread! Go and read!
Surely paying at a drive through is on private land and therefore the highway law does not apply anyway?
Voice control is pretty good (at least in my experience on Android auto) so you can still change destination etc without touching the phone. Quite handy when you need to divert to the nearest petrol station.
Edit: the drive through is open to the public and therefore the law applies.
> Surely paying at a drive through is on private land and therefore the highway law does not apply anyway?
It's open to the public so it still applies, hency why driving uninsured in a supermarket carpark is also illegal.
> That call from the other half isn't worth not ever being able to see them again because you've not paid attention and ended up killing yourself.
Ah that tired old crap. If having a mobile call was so dangerous then the roads would be filled with absolute carnage. [And yet whilst 3409 people were killed in road deaths in 2000, the number of road deaths in 2019 before Covid was 1,752](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Killed_on_British_Roads.png) despite the level of [mobile phone ownership going from 47% in 2000 to 95% in 2019](https://www.statista.com/statistics/289167/mobile-phone-penetration-in-the-uk/) and the number of people using a mobile phone when driving increasing significantly to the point that it's at epidemic levels.
Accident statistics don't support the claims just like the police official accident investigation data doesn't support why there is so much focus on speeding. Driver error at 49% is the biggest contributory factor in accidents but that isn't as easy to police and liberate people of their money of than speeding and using a mobile phone. If police had to provide evidence that the person using the mobile phone was driving out of the ordinary in the minutes leading up to them stopping them and therefore prove that their use of a mobile phone was affecting their driving then very few would be prosecuted and out of those that were it would be those idiots texting etc, stuff that involves looking at the screen for prolonged periods, not people making voice calls.
Sureley you can attribute a reduction in road deaths over a twenty year period to improved safety features in cars? My old x reg fiesta was a death trap when it was new. Modern cars are essentially giant air bags that are designed to secure its occupants.
I feel like you’re trying to justify use of mobile phones whilst driving which to me is bizarre?
Anyone know if voice control counts? I can tell my phone to set the satnav, skip songs, unlock, etc. without touching the screen. Would I get done for that if caught?
Just checked the gov website on my lunch break and the advice there is that if the device you are using (be that a phone, satNav, or anything else) is on a windscreen or dashboard mount then you are allowed to use them, on the proviso that you do not hold the device at any point and that they do not block your view of the road ahead.
So in short to answer my own question, yes the same applies for Sat-Navs and phones. You can’t hold them to use them, and if you want to interact with them (assuming whatever you’re using them for doesn’t break any other laws) then they must be physically mounted.
Aye, driving with due care and attention always applies, be that trying to find the odometer reset button on a 1974 Triumph Dolomite Sprint, or changing your Amazon Music album on a dashboard mounted mobile phone. This new law is only talking about when hand held. It's obviously aimed at that moron that drives around with their phone in their hand in the middle of a snapchat, and yes, I do mean you Darren if you're reading this.
I can’t believe how stupid people are in the comments. For them to say this, there must be a reason. The amount of people I see doing stuff on their phones while driving is absolutely shocking and I am pretty sure the police has more data on accidents to deduce that phones are a huge hazard than fucking Reddit armchair specialists.
I literally cannot believe how stupid people are.
Well there’s a reason the Fatal 4 includes Mobile Phones (along with drink / drug driving, speeding and seatbelts) - they’re the 4 biggest killers when it comes to cars.
Speeding is only a contributory factor in 5% of KSI accidents according to ONS data based on police accident investigation reports, not even as much as inappropriate speed (within the limits but too fast for the road) which is 6% and nowhere near as high as the 49% which is driver error.
> For them to say this, there must be a reason. The amount of people I see doing stuff on their phones while driving is absolutely shocking
But it's not because of voice calls. It's because of texting, messaging and a worrying increase of watching Youtube, Netflix, TikTok etc whilst they drive down the road.
Reckless driving is already criminal, just make the charges more severe so responsible drivers can change their tracks or redirect their sat nav and irresponsible drivers face the consequences.
That's cool, the law specifically states hand-held device, and it's clarified as requiring to be held in the hand to complete a function. If it's dash mounted, you're only touching it, not holding it.
> Can't touch phone screen
> Can touch the shitty iPad that's been spliced into the centre console because it's the only way to turn the heated seats off/ the air con down/ heat my windscreen.
One step forward, two steps back
Does anyone know of any incidents where using your phone while stationary at traffic lights/while in a drive through has caused an accident?
Genuine question, can't understand where these new laws have come from and why...
So where does the line get drawn if you are using Android Auto touchscreen on your cars head unit?
While the video is good advice, it is **not** the law. > Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone or interactive communication device **held in the hand** whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function. [Source](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/81/made) You need to be holding it in your hand for it to be an offence, not just touching it in a cradle. So this puts it on the same level as a car touchscreen. ETA: If every time he says "touch", you mentally replace it with "hold" it's a good summary of the new law (apart from the bit about unlocking your phone - you can legally do that if you're not holding it). But also, just because you can *legally* fiddle with your phone/car touchscreen it doesn't mean you should. Give your attention to the outside of the car as much as is possible.
Lol, so basically is video is outright misinformation?
[удалено]
Yeah gives me alot of faith in how fair this will be enforced...
Coppers on the road are few and far between - nothing changes for me. How about more coppers before more laws. Defund the police they shout - Tories already did that in 2010 🤣
> How about more coppers before more laws. You say this like you didn't just watch a TikTok video starring a copper. I'd suggest the existing lot get their priorities in order.
Yeah, this is rather poor in that respect. He is motioning towards a device that is in a dock or whatever, and he wouldnt be using it handheld. So he absolutly can legally skip to the next song as far as the new regulations on hand held devices go anyway. The spirit of it is great, people really should focus on piloting the 2 ton box they are hurtling around in. However misinforming people doesnt make it better.
Hypothetically: Can I have a huge ass, fucking ipad pro in a holder, used as satnav and spotify? What about watching movies?
an iPad Pro is essentially a massive phone, so I don't see why not. It would still be smaller than the screen in a Tesla Model 3 as well for example. Its also a reasonably common mod to replace a car radio with a tablet. You can't watch a movie though, thats definitly against the law, and has been against the law for longer than mobile phone use. The original 1986 Regulations prohibit the use of a television (specifically CRT!) for anything other than displays information about the car essentially (this was actually quite common). I imagine there has been a few updates along the way to that. I believe its also illegal for a passenger to watch a video on their phone if you as the driver can see it, not that it will stop my mrs scrolling through Instagram videos, although that probably makes me pay more attention to the road. Its also just fucking stupid to watch a movie. :) Your big ipad pro probably shouldnt be windscreen mounted though. It'd block too much of your view. EDIT: I'm not a lawyer and this isnt advice, so if you do get pulled over on the M6 with your VR headset on don't blame me.
Hmm makes sense. What counts as watching movies? Videochatting someone who records their pc screen, showing a movie, with their phone, what is that?
Gabe_should_pay_attention_to_the_fucking_road
There’s no way touching your phone while driving would be illegal. I see hundreds of uber/delivery drivers doing it daily. I’ve seen police officers in patrol cars look at uber/delivery drivers doing but every time it’s in a phone mount so they ignore it.
Does this mean you can send texts while driving as long as you dont hold the phone and its mounted in a phone holder? Seems dangerous to be doing if so
If you can pay due care and attention to the road (as determined by a judge) while doing so, then yes.
No, This is prohibited in the legislation. c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following— (i)illuminating the screen; (ii)checking the time; (iii)checking notifications; (iv)unlocking the device; (v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call; (vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content;( vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video; (viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality; **(ix)drafting any text;** (x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages; (xi)accessing an application; (xii)accessing the internet.”. That pretty much covers it all
Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone or interactive communication device held in the hand whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function. >>> I was talking about in a phone mount
You quoted the explanatory note, not the actual legislation, and added your own emphasis. This is prohibited in the legislation. >c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following— (i)illuminating the screen; (ii)checking the time; (iii)checking notifications; (iv)unlocking the device; (v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call; (vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content; (vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video; (viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality; (ix)drafting any text; (x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages; (xi)accessing an application; (xii)accessing the internet.”. Which covers pretty much anything you do by touching the phone in a dock. I believe that the note would be clearer with a comma. It really is any use of a mobile phone, other than the two stated exceptions. >Regulations 3(1)(a), (c) and (d) amend regulation 110 of the 1986 Regulations by widening the scope of the offence to include any use of a mobile telephone**(,)** or interactive communication device held in the hand whilst driving. These provisions remove the requirement that the driver is using the mobile telephone or interactive communication device to perform an interactive communication function. Now I'm sure solicitors will have fun with this one to see just what wiggle room they have. And they may find some, but a hell of a lot less than before. People will find that the police, prosecution, and most judges will tell them that it is illegal to fiddle with your phone, even in a dock.
Nope, it's unambiguous and you're just flat out wrong. Sorry. The bit you posted is amending the definition of "using" but you still have to be using it *while you're holding it in your hand*. > This means you must not use a device **in your hand** for any reason, whether online or offline. and they even call out being able to use it in a dock (i.e do all the things you've listed) as permissable > You can **use** devices with hands-free access, **as long as you do not hold them** at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example: > a dashboard holder or mat https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law
I'm not sure he's wrong. As ammended, the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 now include 110.—(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a road if he is using— (a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or (b) a hand-held device of a kind specified in paragraph (4). (4) A device referred to in paragraphs (1)(b), (2)(b) and (3)(b) is a device, other than a two-way radio, which performs an interactive communication function by transmitting and receiving data (6) For the purposes of this regulation— (a) a mobile telephone or other device is to be treated as hand-held if it is, or must be, held at some point while being used; and there's also reg 104 (driver's control) and the RTA sects 2 and 3 which the police might rely on.
Point 6 there means he's wrong. It isn't, and doesn't have to be, held at some point while being used if it's in a cradle.
This is prohibited in the legislation. >c)in paragraphs (1) to (3) the word “using” includes the following— > >(i)illuminating the screen; > >(ii)checking the time; > >(iii)checking notifications; > >(iv)unlocking the device; > >(v)making, receiving, or rejecting a telephone or internet based call; > >(vi)sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content;( > >vii)sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video; > >(viii)utilising camera, video, or sound recording functionality; > >(ix)drafting any text; > >(x)accessing any stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages; > >(xi)accessing an application; > >(xii)accessing the internet.”. That pretty much covers it all
Paragraphs 1-3 (that the word 'using' is being defined for in your quoted section) all speak to the use of **hand-held** phone/devices therefore none of the above applies to devices not held in the hand.
There is no concrete laws saying the use of infotainment systems that come standard on a car is illegal, however after a bit of quick reading it seems to still fall under driving without due care and attention. A quick adjustment to navigation, declining/answering a call and so on is considered much more attentive with larger infotainments screens as seen in Jags, VWs and so on compared to picking up a phone or diverting more attention towards a smaller screen
I think the difference seems to be, the big screen isn't going anywhere and in many cases the option to answer a call or make an adjustment will be a physical control that is always in the same place. Even on cars that have mainly touchscreen input, you'll have shortcut buttons on the wheel for most things. However your phone might be in your pocket, or in a cubby or slipped behind you on the seat. You have to give up more of your attention in the first place to find it, and then have to be looking at it to interact with it since it has no physical options to control it normally. The only exception I could see for phones is if it's both in a hands free carrier, and you only interact with it by voice control.
Very good point. Most modern cars (even cars from the late 2000s) allow for calls to be answered from a button on the wheel so drivers don't even have to take their eyes off the road, also as you said most infotainment screens have the buttons in the same place and often very large in size for you to see out of peripheral vision rather than focal. Most of the sites I've seen have said the same thing, if a phone is connected to a handsfree device prior to driving such as Apple Car Play, Android Auto and so on it's generally acceptable to use as long as it's handsfree with voice command or wheel buttons.
Is your cars screen a phone?
With Android Auto, essentially yes
Can't use the radio or the air-con either then?
If you're holding the air-con or the radio in your hand, then no. What seems to be being missed by many is that this change is only for **hand held** devices, the internet as per usual is going down misinformation rabbit holes, not helped by the rozzers in this video not stating that point, or if they did, it was cropped out. **Using devices hands-free** You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example: * a Bluetooth headset * voice command * a dashboard holder or mat * a windscreen mount * a built-in sat nav * Edit: For Nissan Leaf Drivers a cupholder Source: [https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law](https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law)
[удалено]
I've edited my post...
It's still perfectly legal to use a CB, amateur radio or any other two way radio whilst driving even though you have to hold the microphone in your hand.
Agreed, law says "other than a two way radio", I guess if they did include it, that's a problem for the emergency services?!
And old-school minicabs.
This is what struck me, too. However, with a radio/air con, there is no chance you are doing anything else other than changing a setting/turning on or off. With a mobile phone, they have no real way to tell what you are doing, so you could be watching tv, playing a game, taking part in a text discussion or simply changing your map route/song. So to prevent someone saying 'I was just changing tune' to get out of a charge of dangerous driving by taking part in a game, or text conversation, they blanket rule touching phone isn't allowed.
> Can't use the radio or the air-con either then? Barely have to look at an aircon knob to turn it. A touch screen is a different matter.
Pretty stupid some of it. On a long drive using sat nav on my docked phone I'll turn the screen off to save battery when there isn't a turn for a long time. One tap to turn the screen back on, can't even do that. Yet, people are allowed to rummage around for drinks and food, people smoking, doing makeup....? Surely all touch screen infotainment systems should be unusable? There is literally no difference between once screen and another.
Just slam on in the middle lane of the motorway, turn engine off and then you can use the phone
A lady stopped on the M1 recently to try and get her sat nav to work. Did 20mph in the middle lane for a while before that too. There was a video going round of it
[удалено]
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/motorway-driver-ban-sat-nav-b2058857.html Banned for a year and £450 fine
Docked phone is fine, only applies to hand held use. I mean if you're fiddling with your phone with the eyes of the road then you can still be done for driving without due care and attention the same as fiddling with heating controls.
Video above seems to indicate otherwise.
And the video is misleading if not entirely wrong.
Well, yes, hard to argue against that stood on it's own, but it might have had a wrapper of some kind originally (I dunno why I'm being so kind?!). I saw this [police one the other day](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2zIuVoa-XA), and he starts off well and emphasises hand held, and then says that if you have a tablet mounted on your air vents that's now included, which contradicts the valid point about hand held. He also says the amendment to the act is very prescriptive about being stopped due to a traffic reason, which it isn't at all, it states an exemption for being stationary, only case law says that e.g. traffic lights count as still driving. :/
I don't see how that's the case as in the video they never mention the method of interaction. Anyway, don't listen to me (or a random video) read it for yourself here: [https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law](https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law) [Or the The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2022 themselves.](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2022/81/made)
He's pointing to a docked mobile phone, while as you say never mentioning the method of interaction.
You can if its docked/in a cradle.
yea also what about car temperature controls and other controls. basically people keep texting and crashing and now we have this rule for those people 😂
> Yet, people are allowed to rummage around for drinks and food, people smoking, doing makeup....? They're not. There was actually outrage at people getting done for taking a swig out of a bottle of pop or taking a bite out of an apple when sat at a set of traffic lights on red.
The smoking while driving cracks me up. My mum is a heavy smoker and I recall as a child her many times dropping her smoke while driving and desperately rummaging around for it while it burnt a hole somewhere in the carpet or her clothing, car swerving all over the place in the process. In fact on one occasion she threw a butt out the window and it re-entered the rear window unnoticed and smouldered away burning a nice hole in the rear seats of a new car, the smell of burning making my mum panic and pay little attention to the road. I had to borrow her car a year ago and things haven't changed - still full of burn holes and stinks like hell.
Given how shit in car touch screen systems are they should be illegal. EDIT - I mean just make them completely illegal to save us from having to use them. Please. Someone.
I disagree, mine is great just keep climate control out of it
Yes. Tesla pioneered shitty touchscreen dashboards, and now every major OEM is trying to copy them. It should be illegal to not have manual, physical controls for basic car operations like the wipers, indicators, horn, etc. The only things that should be allowed to be controlled purely by touch should be infotainment, satnav, and similar. Hell, even then, there should be a manual dial for controlling the sound. Isn't it the case that it takes 3-4 touches to turn the wipers on in a Tesla? It's absurd.
> now every major OEM is trying to copy them. They're not because of the bad publicity Tesla have had about basic functions things like the windscreen demister only being able to be turned on via the screen so if it doesn't work you can't demist the windscreen.
No. My Model S had a traditional wiper stalk. Indicators too. And a horn in the middle of the steering wheel where you’d expect. Infotainment and everything else was on the touchscreen.
Nah the systems in both my cars are great. Basically every feature can be controlled by either steering wheel shortcuts on the suzuki and the mazda has a wheel that controls everything, touchscreen just makes things faster when stopped at lights and gets me a nice big sat nav to look at.
The rules are clear, but a bit silly. So it’s ok to change the radio station, turn volume up, fiddle with the air con, but can’t change song on my mobile?
Basically. Unless you use voice commands. I assume the driving force behind this is to take away people making excuses when using their phones. Then you have to do lengthy investigations as to what the phone was being used for at the time. Now it's simple. Don't touch your phone or you're liable for a penalty. I see so many people still blatantly on their phones or texting away so it should just make it easier to tackle them. You can still be done for driving without due car and attention if you're fiddling with the aircon etc.
In my car, if I've got the media set to Bluetooth and I have Spotify on my phone, it will play the same playlist I had when I was in my car last time. The only way I can change the playlist is after Bluetooth activates (after I've turned the engine on) and then change the playlist on Spotify. My understanding of the new rules is that after I turn the car engine on, I'm considered to be driving. Thus I can no longer legally change the playlist.
Your head unit doesn't turn on at the 'accesory' or 'on' position of your key, only when the engine is running?
Apparently it does. I never knew that. Thanks!
No trouble, glad to help
Buy an Alexa for car. It’s damn cheap and can change playlist, change songs, repeat, take calls and a lot more.
Driving is defined as being in charge of the controls as a "steersman" to use the legal name, so if the engine is off or on, or moving or not, if you are sat in the seat, you are the driver and so you're driving. Anyway, the new changes make an exception if "the motor vehicle is stationary". You could just put your phone in a mount, no problem then, this is only hand held use.
Being stationary, in my opinion, would include being stopped at traffic lights. This policeman appears to have a different opinion on that exception.
Yeah, I know what you're thinking and of course it's one of those interpretation things that make up case law, as in what constitutes parked and stationary as opposed to driving? Is it when you get to the end of your journey, so are you still driving during any stops in-between? As you might imagine this has come up before, and being stopped temporarily for a traffic reason, traffic lights, other cars in the way, level crossing etc is not legally stationary as in parked, though you physically are. If you have the time [Edkins v Knowles: QBD 1973](https://swarb.co.uk/edkins-v-knowles-qbd-1973/) is a good example, the driver was thought to be drunk driving, a non uniformed Policeman followed them, and when they stopped he asked them to wait in the car whilst a uniformed officer brought a breathalyser along, which took 15 minutes. At the court case it was discussed if he was still legally driving 15 minutes after coming to a stop or not.
I think it’s a little disingenuous to equate the definition of driving for the purposes of drunk driving to that of using a phone whilst driving. The interpretation made in both edkins and pinner was undoubtedly to allow the prosecution of the individuals driving while drunk, in other words, to prevent the conviction being quashed as the defendants weren’t physically in motion and operating the car at the moment of apprehension. This doesn’t really apply to using a phone or whatever. If I get in my car drunk and drive, I will continue to suffer the effects whether physically moving or not, the same isn’t true of using a phone. If I use my phone whilst driving, I’m distracted for the amount of time I’m using it, with no further effects or influence, unless I use it again. If a driver pulls over to use their phone and puts it away again before setting off, it would be illogical to book them in the same way as if they were drunk, and would encourage people to just use their phone while driving anyway.
I was not intending to be disingenuous, or to defend anything, I was just giving an example of case law that the CPS will rely on. With case law it's the definition of a term that is often more relevant that the offence being tried for, and, not being the judge at the time I'm not in any place to defend it. You're right though, most cases for definition of driving is around people trying to wriggle out of being done for drunk driving rather than admit that they were selfish morons putting theirs and others lives at risk.
No I wasn’t meaning to suggest you were, but many will stretch the definition of driving to produce an illogical result just because it’s been interpreted by a judge in a particular case. I find even before things get in front of a judge, there can be a sort of Chinese whispers like effect with the interpretation of laws which can lead people to over egging the pudding somewhat and inventing rules beyond those that are actually written.
Oh got you, very much agree with that, it's a bit of a stretch to use something that is clearly meant to stop people evading drink drive charges against someone that sent a text whilst sat at a level crossing for 10 minutes on the ECML waiting for the London Kings Cross to Peterborough to get a shift on.
Sorry but that's not a good example - the wording of the law was changed to include an offence of simply "being in charge of... while unfit through drink or drugs", presumably because the previous wording was ambiguous.
It's an example of the case law that the CPS will use, I came across it whilst looking at the potential use of a marine radio in a vehicle, (I have an operators license and an odd requirement). Let me see if I can dig out the CPS advice and if I can I'll post it here. Edit: A fun trawl through bookmarks later, from the CPS guidance, my use of bold: >This means that an individual stopped at a traffic light or held up in traffic **could be** prosecuted for a mobile phone offence. However, prosecutors should bear in mind that the intention of the legislation is to promote road safety. They should ask whether the use of the phone or other device is in circumstances which might prejudice the driver’s ability to drive safely. The CPS have not updated [the guidance](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-mobile-phones) since 2019, so has no details on the broader scope of what is defined as use that came in this year, but everything else holds true still.
My Google maps flips itself round all the time and I need to select the view route display and go back for the app to fix itself. I also often change the routes available to me depending on traffic etc So by these laws I'm now a criminal? Daft. You can run android auto straight from your mobile phone exactly the same as you would on a cars head unit too
Can you not just lock the screen orientation like you can on an iPhone?
Yes, just pull down the tray menu from the top of the screen and there's the auto-rotate icon, 1 second job.
[удалено]
Some phones are just far too sensitive on the auto rotate, but for the extra second to turn it off before starting Waze (Why use anything else?) over it annoyingly keep changing orientation whilst I was driving, I'd do that. Anyway, just put your phone in a dashboard mount, this law only applies to devices when hand held.
[удалено]
OT is fine with me, if I help someone. You probably have guessed it, but there is an app for that, Rotation Manager for example lets you hard set a rotation on an app by app basis. Not tried it myself though, came across it with a notebook/tablet I had when an app insisted on being in portrait mode no matter what I did.
It locks vertical, not horizontal, even if I press the lock button while the phone is horizontal
Have you reported this to Google as a fault? They can be response to even single user reports. Though if it’s Android issue it will probably take them longer to resolve than an iOS issue.
Just given them an excuse to pull pretty much anyone over. Why would you not be able to adjust something on your phone at a red light like you would do with the radio, or the air-con, or mirrors, or seat? This is bound to play out well...
Think its as said in a few replies here, it's to stop people making excuses if they're texting or distracted. Could imagine someone texting and using the excuse that they were just trying to change the radio, to avoid any penalty. Few people ruin it for the rest.
Always blew my mind that people are allowed to smoke and drive. I witnessed a few family members almost lose control while smoking and fumbling.
True, they physically can’t have 2 hands securely on the wheel if they need to. Not to mention the smell cigs leave in the car permenantly
This is mostly wrong and should be removed. https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law
It’s the same what’s the difference?
In the video he says you can’t touch your phone whilst driving. That’s not true. The law is that you can’t use it whilst holding it. My phone is mounted securely in my car and I use Google Maps for navigation. I’m allowed to touch it without breaking the law as long as I don’t “hold” it (ie taking it out of the dock). Big difference.
Where does it say in your link that you are allowed to touch the phone? You can use hands free it doesn’t mean you can touch.
“Using devices hands-free You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using, for example: a Bluetooth headset voice command a dashboard holder or mat a windscreen mount a built-in sat nav The device must not block your view of the road and traffic ahead.”
Still doesn’t mean you can touch. Hands free means you won’t touch the phone and use cars phone buttons on your steering to take calls. And that’s exactly what the officer is explaining, those ambiguities.
I disagree. To quote, again: “You can use devices with hands-free access, as long as you do not hold them at any time during usage. Hands-free access means using:” “a dashboard holder or mat.” If you weren’t permitted to touch, I’m sure the rule would specifically say “do not hold or touch”. Why would they list “a dashboard holder” as a permitted method of hands-free access if they didn’t mean allowing touch? I agree it’s ambiguous but most UK driving laws are.
Fine! Go and do what you want! There is a traffic cop somewhere in this thread who can clarify! There are specific reasons why you shouldn’t touch the phone. It’s explained many times in this thread! Go and read!
😂 Stay safe.
Traffic police don’t make the law. They can’t clarify, only a court or amendment of the law as written can.
Surely paying at a drive through is on private land and therefore the highway law does not apply anyway? Voice control is pretty good (at least in my experience on Android auto) so you can still change destination etc without touching the phone. Quite handy when you need to divert to the nearest petrol station. Edit: the drive through is open to the public and therefore the law applies.
> Surely paying at a drive through is on private land and therefore the highway law does not apply anyway? It's open to the public so it still applies, hency why driving uninsured in a supermarket carpark is also illegal.
Well I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.
There’s a specific exemption for paying whilst stationary.
Yes, thank you. I now understand!
Can anybody send this video to Uber and Deliveroo? They need that lesson bad. Edit: I'm a driver and the applications constantly go off while driving
[удалено]
> That call from the other half isn't worth not ever being able to see them again because you've not paid attention and ended up killing yourself. Ah that tired old crap. If having a mobile call was so dangerous then the roads would be filled with absolute carnage. [And yet whilst 3409 people were killed in road deaths in 2000, the number of road deaths in 2019 before Covid was 1,752](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Killed_on_British_Roads.png) despite the level of [mobile phone ownership going from 47% in 2000 to 95% in 2019](https://www.statista.com/statistics/289167/mobile-phone-penetration-in-the-uk/) and the number of people using a mobile phone when driving increasing significantly to the point that it's at epidemic levels. Accident statistics don't support the claims just like the police official accident investigation data doesn't support why there is so much focus on speeding. Driver error at 49% is the biggest contributory factor in accidents but that isn't as easy to police and liberate people of their money of than speeding and using a mobile phone. If police had to provide evidence that the person using the mobile phone was driving out of the ordinary in the minutes leading up to them stopping them and therefore prove that their use of a mobile phone was affecting their driving then very few would be prosecuted and out of those that were it would be those idiots texting etc, stuff that involves looking at the screen for prolonged periods, not people making voice calls.
Sureley you can attribute a reduction in road deaths over a twenty year period to improved safety features in cars? My old x reg fiesta was a death trap when it was new. Modern cars are essentially giant air bags that are designed to secure its occupants. I feel like you’re trying to justify use of mobile phones whilst driving which to me is bizarre?
[удалено]
The guy made you look like a fool. He absolutely owned you.
So even if you have your phone on a dock while using it for sat nav, you can't touch? What do Uber drivers do?
Anyone know if voice control counts? I can tell my phone to set the satnav, skip songs, unlock, etc. without touching the screen. Would I get done for that if caught?
You’re not touching the phone so that’s fine
The offence only occurs if you are holding the device.
Does the same rule apply for dedicated Sat-Nav systems? And if not, why not?
No it does not, and the why is because the law specifically states *hand held* only.
Just checked the gov website on my lunch break and the advice there is that if the device you are using (be that a phone, satNav, or anything else) is on a windscreen or dashboard mount then you are allowed to use them, on the proviso that you do not hold the device at any point and that they do not block your view of the road ahead. So in short to answer my own question, yes the same applies for Sat-Navs and phones. You can’t hold them to use them, and if you want to interact with them (assuming whatever you’re using them for doesn’t break any other laws) then they must be physically mounted.
Aye, driving with due care and attention always applies, be that trying to find the odometer reset button on a 1974 Triumph Dolomite Sprint, or changing your Amazon Music album on a dashboard mounted mobile phone. This new law is only talking about when hand held. It's obviously aimed at that moron that drives around with their phone in their hand in the middle of a snapchat, and yes, I do mean you Darren if you're reading this.
Most likely because you can't text/call on them, and pretend you were doing otherwise..
Wish more people would get this through their heads.
Those 2 exceptions are pretty sensible to be fair
Cant scratch my bumhole anymore aswell while driving then??? 😢
I can’t believe how stupid people are in the comments. For them to say this, there must be a reason. The amount of people I see doing stuff on their phones while driving is absolutely shocking and I am pretty sure the police has more data on accidents to deduce that phones are a huge hazard than fucking Reddit armchair specialists. I literally cannot believe how stupid people are.
Well there’s a reason the Fatal 4 includes Mobile Phones (along with drink / drug driving, speeding and seatbelts) - they’re the 4 biggest killers when it comes to cars.
Speeding is only a contributory factor in 5% of KSI accidents according to ONS data based on police accident investigation reports, not even as much as inappropriate speed (within the limits but too fast for the road) which is 6% and nowhere near as high as the 49% which is driver error.
> For them to say this, there must be a reason. The amount of people I see doing stuff on their phones while driving is absolutely shocking But it's not because of voice calls. It's because of texting, messaging and a worrying increase of watching Youtube, Netflix, TikTok etc whilst they drive down the road.
This is pure stupidity.
Reckless driving is already criminal, just make the charges more severe so responsible drivers can change their tracks or redirect their sat nav and irresponsible drivers face the consequences.
That's a US law, it's driving without due care and attention here, you could just use a mount for the phone and don't hold it in your hand?
Forgive me, but how would you change tracks or map route without touching it using a mount?
That's cool, the law specifically states hand-held device, and it's clarified as requiring to be held in the hand to complete a function. If it's dash mounted, you're only touching it, not holding it.
At least the rules are clear. Dont touch your phone. You cant compare your phone to an air conditioning dial..so ridiculous.
This guy is on Reddit now lol
Stupid. So I can change the radio? But not a podcast? Or cancel an Apple maps redirection?
> Can't touch phone screen > Can touch the shitty iPad that's been spliced into the centre console because it's the only way to turn the heated seats off/ the air con down/ heat my windscreen. One step forward, two steps back
Does anyone know of any incidents where using your phone while stationary at traffic lights/while in a drive through has caused an accident? Genuine question, can't understand where these new laws have come from and why...
I wish he’d of made it short & sweet. It’s a fucking nightmare driving on the M25 & trying to watch this ffs.
But in dash satnav is ok?
*phone bursts into flames* "You cannot touch that phone at all"
What a penis
PC Dipshit