Filmed by cyclist touching a device

jsrose

No!  No I’ve no idea why he didn’t check this!  He checked everything else!

jsrose

Going to close this now - i think i will see what happens.  Will let you know outcome.

user1977

TooManyPoints said:

If they think they can prove that you were holding the phone (while using it and while driving), perhaps. But like I said, it's holding the phone which is a necessary part of the offence 

Perhaps you could tell us where you get this idea from (and preferably provide some authority). The term "hand-held" is only mentioned in the statute to define the type of device. The law says nothing at all about "holding" the phone.

No, the regulations define (in para (6)(a)) what "hand-held" means for the purposes of the regulations - and that says that a phone is treated as hand-held if it is actually being held while being used. No more and no less. Following your logic, you could be illegally "using" the phone by voice command - there are no other references in the regulations to touching or handling the phone.

If you believe that placing the phone on the passenger seat or balancing it on the driver's knee whilst operating it does not constitute "using" it (because it is not being held) I fear you may be mistaken. As I said earlier, it would make a nonsense of the law.

You might think it's a nonsense, and that the regulations ought to cover wider types of use of phones, but that's what they say. If a driver is actually being distracted by having a phone on their lap (or eating their lunch off their lap, or fiddling with the radio controls, or whatever) then that would need be dealt with under other offences.

[Deleted User]

flaneurs_lobster said:

jsrose said:

So i have been sent a charge notice by Police as a member of the public sent in footage from his dashcam - a cyclist - touching a device - not holding it - while statist traffic lights. 

I would love to grass up the many offending motorists I see on a daily basis when cycling. Is there a central address to send footage or does each police force have their own process? 

Quite a few use the Next Base portal, in particular around the Midlands, I routinely report people who endanger others - ignoring no left turn signs (designed to protect cyclists and pedestrians using a crossing), jumping red lights and close passes. Each force does it in their own way, I have yet to receive even a follow up notice on what happened (some forces do seem to do this) let alone any request from the police to attend court

[Deleted User]

eastcorkram said:

jsrose said:

To be fair i specifically said ‘device’.  Just reading through my SJPN and he does say he would be willing to come to court to testify.   But he also admits that the footage has been digitally altered - he says ‘slowed down’.  He also accuses me of having no insurance- which is absolutely not the case - that is not what i have been charged with though!

Any idea why they would accuse you of having no insurance?

Ask MID will tell you if the car is recorded as having insurance. I usually add it on to the report I am filling in on the police portal if the car is listed as untaxed/no MOT though I don't normally check insurance

eskbanker

GrumpyDil said:

Is the OP now suggesting it was not a phone but a device used to open the car park barrier or have I misunderstood that? 

jsrose said:

To be fair i specifically said ‘device’.

Would it really hurt to simply clarify exactly what 'device' you're referring to, rather than being unnecessarily cryptic and sitting silently on the sidelines while everyone ties themselves in knots about phones?

[Deleted User]

MalMonroe said:

jsrose said:

Ok so an update - firstly i have a SJPN that i need to plea by 2 November.  I have tried to log in but it is not accepting my case URN.  I have also tried to view the evidence via an email they sent me - but it has been removed and i can’t access it

Also i paid £200 in a panic in September to The Court and yesterday i have received it refunded.

I’m confused as i haven’t sent my plea in yet.  

Hi, I'm confused too.

You said -

". . . I’m unable to log on with my Case URN - plus the fact that the evidence has been removed from an email i was sent - what do you think will happen?  Plea is needed by 2 November but postal strikes all next week?  Really hoping case will be dropped and I’m getting my £200 back."

You can't access any of the information. You paid £200 in September and you're received a refund? What was the £200 for?  The fact that it's been refunded is a little weird.

And why is everything in such a big rush? Court cases usually take a while to be processed before they actually issue a date.

If you want to make a defence - which I certainly would - then you need to be able to see ALL the 'evidence' against you. Have you had sight of it at all? Only when you've seen that can you prepare any kind of comprehensive case.

And why are the police simply taking the cyclist's photographic evidence as proof positive of any offence having been committed? How near to your vehicle was this cyclist and didn't you notice him filming you at all?  

The police will be able to obtain information from your phone to either prove or disprove whether or not you were actually using the phone at any time, surely?

If it were me, given the confusion surrounding this case, I'd be phoning the court (there will be a number somewhere on the information you've been sent, there always is on court documents. If you can't find it, you can use the information in this link to find it - https://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal) and telling them that you cannot access the evidence that you have been sent and you want to make a defence but you are unable to do so since you don't have the information necessary.

After that you could try contacting Citizens Advice for some help. 

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/finding-free-or-affordable-legal-help/

(Are you sure that this is a real thing, though? It really does seem very fishy to me.)

This is potentially dangerous misinformation.

Starting at the bottom - the police issue a notice when they are reporting someone for further action. Of course it is real, it will come from the police force with all verifiable information. It is not "very fishy" at all, and OP should not treat it this way at all. The fact they have the case and details of how to apply take the issue to court says it all.

If the police are given footage of someone breaking the law and choose to issue a FPN or NIP, going to court to challenge it risks more of a fine. It is very poor advice to recommend anyone go to court over these things (at the very least they should consult a legal expert first) without comprehensive evidence to support their case. You are free to do it it of course but it is highly likely you would regret it. A conditional offer of points and a fine for something like mobile phone use or speeding is simple - say £200 fine and 6 points for phone use. If opting to appeal via court you have to take the time to go to the court and the fine can be up to £1000 - the 6 points is fixed.

Film footage (not photographic evidence) of a person driving while using a phone must be sufficiently convincing to the police that they decided to prosecute. Do you think a rider would stand there with a film camera? Head or bike mounted cameras are very small and can easily be confused with helmet mounted lights. Remember a bike rider is higher up than most drivers and so can film down into the car. It's easy to catch people on mobile phones long before they notice you and by then it's too late.

I would love to hear how you think OP can make a "comprehensive case" vs video footage.

user1977

eskbanker said:

GrumpyDil said:

Is the OP now suggesting it was not a phone but a device used to open the car park barrier or have I misunderstood that? 

jsrose said:

To be fair i specifically said ‘device’.

Would it really hurt to simply clarify exactly what 'device' you're referring to, rather than being unnecessarily cryptic and sitting silently on the sidelines while everyone ties themselves in knots about phones?

Indeed - the devices which purely open garage doors, barriers etc do not (typically) "perform an interactive communication function by transmitting and receiving data" so aren't caught by the regulations we've been talking about anyway.

sheramber

if the phone isn't being held but  is in a cradle  on the dash, is using it to send a text while driving okay?

You are not holding it so it must be, from what is being said.

user1977

sheramber said:

if the phone isn't being held but  is in a cradle  on the dash, is using it to send a text while driving okay?

You are not holding it so it must be, from what is being said.

It wouldn't be an offence under those regulations - it's the same as fiddling with anything else on your dashboard - so still potentially careless driving.