The Dept for Transport is consulting on an increase in fines/points where Fixed Penalty Notices are issued for using handheld 'phone while driving:
tinyurl.com/hq8dj4u (pdf doc on gov website).
Main points are upping fine from £100 to £150 and points from 3 to 4 (6 for offences at wheel of LGV/PSV). Rationale is reduction of casualties, particularly pedestrians and cyclists.
Contains some interesting discussion on phones/apps with a 'safe driving mode' which reduces functionality when it senses phone moving at much over walking pace.
Consultation closes on 15/03/2016.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 26 Jan 16 at 14:08
|
|
I bet they never consult motorists or phone users.
|
|
That would leave my mother and a handful of others. Who else uses neither a car nor a phone?
|
|
They are asking us if we want them to steal even more money from us when we use mobile phones as they are designed to be used. Do they expect us to cry Yes! Go ahead! or what?
|
Hmmm.
"1.20 Despite the FPN increase from £60 to £100 in 2013 there was no statistically significant change to the number of drivers observed using a hand-held mobile phone from 2009-2014"
"2.10 The preferred option is to implement the penalty level increase as set out in Option 3
of a £150 FPN..."
It seems to me that there is a formula of (Risk of detection/fine) x (Size of fine). If risk of detection/fine is close to zero, the size of the fine is pretty irrelevant.
|
The death penalty might work, but is probably unacceptable for other reasons.
It seems to me they have gone beyond the point of officially frowning on an act that obviously does carry a certain risk, and taken it to the point where the penalties are absurdly out of proportion to those for other forms of distraction in a car, most of which are perfectly legal.
The result is that the rule will inevitably be ignored, and the Tigger Formula will apply.
It's one of the major contributions of the motor car to modern civilisation - the replacement of the concept of right and wrong and law and order with one of the simple weighing up of penalty against inconvenience and chance of being caught.
|
New research from the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) shows that 9% of
drivers surveyed admitted taking a selfie whilst driving ‘in the last month’. This
increases to 19% of 25-35 year olds
What??? How does it even occur to anybody to do that?
|
>> Contains some interesting discussion on phones/apps with a 'safe driving mode' which reduces functionality when it senses phone moving at much over walking pace.
>>
That will be really useful for the odd train traveller who makes phone calls, depending on your point of view
|
I spent from 3am to 7am this morning writing a section on lorry drivers and the use of mobile phones while driving, into my course.
I covered the risks, the penalties and followed the same path I follow every year.
I explained the company has now carried out their duties in informing their drivers of the risks, the company policy and disciplinary procedure so it now rests 100% on their shoulders should they still choose to do it.
I suspect it won't make a scrap of difference to those who do it at the moment.
However, I managed to get a small video removed from Facebook of one of Brett's lorries drifting all over the A1 while talking on his personal mobile phone. I saved this video before it was removed. The TM and I know who it was and we managed to keep the whole thing from higher management.
This video is now embedded in the presentation and will be shown to every driver.
That will work far more than any warnings I give them!
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Tue 26 Jan 16 at 16:54
|
>>However, I managed to get a small video removed from Facebook of one of Brett's lorries drifting all over the A1 while talking on his personal mobile phone. I saved this video before it was removed. The TM and I know who it was and we managed to keep the whole thing from higher management.
Think that through.....
1) Imagine, 6 months from now the same driver is driving along using his phone, crashes and kills 10 people. Then it comes out that you and the TM knew about him doing it before and concealed it, as opposed to having reported it and prevent the deaths,
2) 6 months from now another driver is caught and says he thought it was accepted because you and the TM had helped protect the last driver to do it and that's why all the drivers do it.
3) Some git reads this open Forum and forwards your note to the Brett's Senior Management and a witch-hunt starts.
Which of these scenarios do you fancy coping with?
Because if I was part of that Higher Management and this came to my ears, that essentially I was being undermined and stuff about my company was being publicly discussed but hidden from me, by people employed or contracted by me, those people would be staked to ant hills.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 26 Jan 16 at 17:04
|
1) Diver was reprimanded by TM and given warning as per drivers handbook procedure at the time.
2) It is made clear by myself that it is NOT accepted and said driver has been reprimanded ( see above)
3) This has been discussed with, and approved by, senior management as the most effective way of managing the problem.
I certainly wouldn't have discussed it here if it hadn't been.
Pat
|
Then what was "we managed to keep the whole thing from higher management" all about??
And why on earth would you discuss anything openly that you were keeping from anybody?
Still, your call. No skin off my nose.
|
|
And what festering, slimy, cowardly t*** gave me a frownie? Presumably somebody post-lobotomy.
|
Seems like you're just looking for an argument tonight Mark, well look elsewhere!
New boiler finally being fitted and I'm going to be warm again, so I won't be falling out with anyone!
Pat
|
I'm not looking for an argument at all, as i said, no skin off my nose.
You made a comment in an open forum that you were hiding something from someone. I was trying to caution you how that could play out.
Why on earth would I argue about that? You seem to have a pretty big opinion of your relevance.
|
>> Car4Play Frownie giver unmasked....
>>
>> www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/2652227/Old/
>>
Is that Zero?
:-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 26 Jan 16 at 17:52
|
|
Looks like a bloke trying to work out range and bearing with just a doppler shift to me
|
Car4Play Frownie giver unmasked...
|
>> 1) Diver was reprimanded by TM and given warning as per drivers handbook procedure at
>> the time.
>>
>> 2) It is made clear by myself that it is NOT accepted and said driver
>> has been reprimanded ( see above)
>>
>> 3) This has been discussed with, and approved by, senior management as the most effective
>> way of managing the problem.
>>
>> I certainly wouldn't have discussed it here if it hadn't been.
>>
>> Pat
Valid points raised, valid points answered IMO.
|
I'd stick this one in your training course as well.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq1AY0lcmi0
|
>> I'd stick this one in your training course as well.
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq1AY0lcmi0
Nah, just another camera warrior looking for a fight......
:-P
|
|
Have to say - if I was the cyclist I'd have given way not tried to speed up like he did
|
" if I was the cyclist I'd have given way not tried to speed up like he did"
Same here; as I would have done if I'd been in the car (OK, not in the bus lane) and spotted a lorry coming in from the right, who then wanted to turn left. The cyclist was looking for trouble IMO.
|
>> Have to say - if I was the cyclist I'd have given way not tried
>> to speed up like he did
Eh? At what point does cyclist speed up?
The Bretts lorry joins a one way thoroughfare from the right. His left indicator is on indicating he's joining the main carriageway and at 10 seconds he seems to be in right hand lane. At 12 seconds he's behind the cyclist who is in the left lane.
At about 15s it looks as though cyclist moves to right - wishing to go straight on. Lorry accelerates past and tries to beat him to the left fork. As soon as cyclist realises what's up he stops.
Classic case of driver underestimating cyclist's speed.
EDIT: Cyclist going straight on might have moved out sooner. But then of course he'd be getting in the way...
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 26 Jan 16 at 19:45
|
>> >> Have to say - if I was the cyclist I'd have given way not
>> tried
>> >> to speed up like he did
>>
>> Eh? At what point does cyclist speed up?
At about 11sec (ish).
|
"Classic case of driver underestimating cyclist's speed."
No, you were right first time - "Just another camera warrior looking for a fight"
........ I say that as a cyclist.
|
"As soon as cyclist realises what's up he stops"
Well he wasn't concentrating then was he. He stopped when he was almost part of an incident. With proper observation and anticipation he would have stopped much sooner. We could all see what was coming, and we didn't have the benefit of being able to turn our head, or peripheral vision.
I think the lorry driver was somewhat reckless but the cyclist put himself in a position of danger unnecessarily.
|
Its kind of an issue though, isn't it.
The truck was reckless and the source of the problem but the cyclist could easily have avoided it.
You can kind of see why it might hack a cyclist off to keep managing someone else's mistake, however sensible or easy it us to do so.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 27 Jan 16 at 00:57
|
|
Funny, init, after all that hoo haa earlier in the year about cycling deaths in London, people screaming stuff must be done, lorries must be banned, we end up the year end with 9 fatalities. - Less than average.
|
Did that one ages ago, that's old news.
When you have as many vehicles as we do in London every day then there will always be someone complain.
Pat
|
Confiscate the phone, after removinfg SIM card.
Issue fine.
Phone owner has to go collect phone, and pay fine to get it released.
If phone not claimed within 72 hours, then phone service provider is informed that said owner's handset is in 'police custody'.
|
>> Confiscate the phone, after removinfg SIM card.
>> Issue fine.
>> Phone owner has to go collect phone, and pay fine to get it released.
>> If phone not claimed within 72 hours, then phone service provider is informed that said
>> owner's handset is in 'police custody'.
>>
>>
>>
Confiscate phone and show all contents to offenders partner, parents and employer.
|
Why do nearly all the posts in this thread get a scowly face?
Even Pat's, which just reports on progress on her Driver'''s''' Manual.
|
Some lamebrain twazzock think it upstets NFM2R, so far as I can tell. It's all over other threads too.
Feeble. Grown ups ought be a little less puerile.
|
|
If we weren't puerile we wouldn't be on here.
|
>> If we weren't puerile we wouldn't be on here.
>>
In the spirit of that comment, I'll take that as a confession.
|
>> >> If we weren't puerile we wouldn't be on here.
>> >>
>>
>> In the spirit of that comment, I'll take that as a confession.
and an indictment of others.
ALL
|
>> Feeble. Grown ups ought be a little less puerile.
>>
If the mods and the site owner got together and removed the facility for stupid 'thumbs ups' and stupid 'scowly faces' the we wouldn't have the problem.
Why don't you do that, mods and Simon?
(No, it isn't me doing it, either.)
|
>> If the mods and the site owner got together and removed the facility for stupid 'thumbs ups' and stupid 'scowly faces' the we wouldn't have the problem.
What problem? It's certainly a good thing that people can express approval or disapproval for someone's post or apparent attitudes without having to put their feeling into words.
The site would be thinner and less meaningful without thumbs and angry little red faces.
I very seldom use them myself, especially scowlies. Sometimes in jest.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 27 Jan 16 at 15:36
|
|
They don't bother me, hardly ever notice them let alone use them. Happy to let other people get steamed up over it, there's worse out there...
|
>> Why don't you do that, mods and Simon?
Who's Simon?
|
>> Who's Simon?
>>
Probably works in 'Spoons...
|
>> Who's Simon?
I think he means Stephen Khoo. Given the fact that no other website developments occur, I doubt the scowlies functionality will change.
|
>> >> Why don't you do that, mods and Simon?
>>
>> Who's Simon?
>>
Just making sure that you were all paying attention ;-0
BTW the scowlies are going at the moment, someone is just playing silly beggars.
|
Because - quite rightly - there's no thumbs down symbol that counts the number of negatives as that's a guaranteed way to make a forum an unfriendly place.
So the scowly gets misued as a proxy for a thumbs down.
I must say, that cyclist could do with being given a copy of Roadcraft (if it still exists). Idiot. He will end up under somebody's wheels and it will be "Nothing to do with me, guv'."
|
I don't do scowlies.
I don't think the scowler is a regular - just a passing troll.
|
>> I don't think the scowler is a regular - just a passing troll.
Unless things have changed, the person is a regular.
Taken from www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?t=767&m=12341&v=e
"You can only join in the rating system if you are a qualified user. You have to have been registered on this site for a while and have made a certain amount of posts to be qualified."
|
>>
>> So the scowly gets misued as a proxy for a thumbs down.
>>
So why did a nice girl like Pat get a thumbs down just for mentioning her really exciting new driver manual?
:) just in case
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Wed 27 Jan 16 at 13:10
|
I didn't get the scowly until after I'd replied to Marks post querying the content!
Pat
|
|
Don't be thinking its anything to do with me. The whole thing winds me up.
|
>>>The whole thing winds me up.<<
I think you've made that clear:)
Pat
|
">>>The whole thing winds me up.<<
I think you've made that clear:)"
What's this? Mark getting wound up? What have I missed?
|
Increased Penalties for Phone Use - Consultation - Zero
