Taxi Driver Online

We all do it from time to time!



2003 No. 2695


ROAD TRAFFIC


The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2003

Made 20th October 2003
Laid before Parliament 27th October 2003
Coming into force 1st December 2003

The Secretary of State in exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 41(1) and (5) of the Road Traffic Act 1988[1], and after consultation with representative organisations in accordance with section 195(2) of that Act, hereby makes the following Regulations:

Citation, commencement and interpretation
1. These Regulations may be cited as the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2003 and shall come into force on 1st December 2003.

Amendment of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986
2. The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986[2] are amended by inserting after regulation 109 -


" Mobile telephones
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).


(2) No person shall cause or permit any other person to drive a motor vehicle on a road while that other person is using -



(a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or

(b) a hand-held device of a kind specified in paragraph (4).


(3) No person shall supervise a holder of a provisional licence if the person supervising is using -



(a) a hand-held mobile telephone; or

(b) a hand-held device of a kind specified in paragraph (4),


at a time when the provisional licence holder is driving a motor vehicle on a road.

(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.

(5) A person does not contravene a provision of this regulation if, at the time of the alleged contravention -



(a) he is using the telephone or other device to call the police, fire, ambulance or other emergency service on 112 or 999;

(b) he is acting in response to a genuine emergency; and

(c) it is unsafe or impracticable for him to cease driving in order to make the call (or, in the case of an alleged contravention of paragraph (3)(b), for the provisional licence holder to cease driving while the call was being made).


(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 during the course of making or receiving a call or performing any other interactive communication function;

(b) a person supervises the holder of a provisional licence if he does so pursuant to a condition imposed on that licence holder prescribed under section 97(3)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (grant of provisional licence);

(c) "interactive communication function" includes the following:


(i) sending or receiving oral or written messages;

(ii) sending or receiving facsimile documents;

(iii) sending or receiving still or moving images; and

(iv) providing access to the internet;


(d) "two-way radio" means any wireless telegraphy apparatus which is designed or adapted -



(i) for the purpose of transmitting and receiving spoken messages; and

(ii) to operate on any frequency other than 880 MHz to 915 MHz, 925 MHz to 960 MHz, 1710 MHz to 1785 MHz, 1805 MHz to 1880 MHz, 1900 MHz to 1980 MHz or 2110 MHz to 2170 MHz; and


(e) "wireless telegraphy" has the same meaning as in section 19(1) of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1949[3]."






Signed by authority of the Secretary of State


David Jamieson
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Department for Transport

20th October 2003

heres one for you, i was charged the other month for using my mobile.
my car was parked up in a safe place, but the officer informed me that my engine should be switched off also.
now i can find no referance to this anywhere, just that you should "stop in a safe place" which i was.
any one know ?

i think its being in charge of a motor.
if you engine is running i suppose you are in charge.
still all the time the police are talking to you it saves them time finding the people who bit the fellas ear.

yeh funny thing is it was my ear, and i was phoning the cops at the time to report it
does it count as using a mobile if you cant hear oot that ear

I know i shouldnt, but

I think the intention was that if you could use a phone with the engine running then people would use them at lights and in jams etc, and thus in all probability they would be tempted to continue when the traffic starting moving, and it would also be more difficult to enforce it.

Not that it's really enforced anyway, so that's all a bit academic. Unless you're Ali T of course

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

heres the reply from the dft
does it make sense when they dont even know



Ali Turnbull

Thanks for your e-mail.

The mobile phone offence regulations are available on-line at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20032695.htm . You have clearly looked at them.

They refer to using a hand-held phone while "driving". You are correct that there is no definition of driving and the regulations say nothing about engines being switched on or off or parking in a safe place. This is because "driving" depends upon the circumstances at the time of the alleged offence and covering all circumstances all in legislation would be impossible.

We cannot comment on individual cases so our advice is that you should seek legal advice and then consider whether you wish to contest the fixed penalty notice or summons.

Sorry that I cannot be more helpful.






Tim Norman
Road User Safety Division
Dept for Transport
LONDON SW1P 4DR
020 7944 2043
7/2/06

You would have thought the act's draftsmen would have defined exactly what they want to be illegal.

_________________
IDFIMH

perhaps a new thread could be started, titled.

"are we moving towards a police state, or is it here already, You decide"

I thought we were moving away from one

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

They probably thought that providing an adequate definition of it would be unduly complicated, and over-defining it would leave it too easy to find loopholes the definition.

So effectively that would leave the police to define driving, and that's what I alluded to earlier.

Of course, ultimately the courts would have to decide what consituted 'driving' if anyone like Ali challenged the police's interpretation of it, thus to that extent the draftsmen would be passing the buck, but you can't define things in legislation in the way that a court judgement can.

I suspect that, despite what the DfT letter email seemed to say, the police use definitions of 'driving' taken from other road traffic law contexts (like drink driving?), which they would then probably use if challenged in court.

Thus they may argue that driving should include any time that the engine is running, since otherwise it would be difficult to come up with a workable and enforceable definition.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk