Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for this! I'm still not clear if I'm facing more than 6 points on my license though. Can you explain any further please? When I accept the 2nd speeding ticket, will they just charge me £100 and 3 points, or will they be more severe concenquences since that offense took place the following day of the 1st offense? Similarly, when I accept the 3rd offense, will they look at my record or just charge me with the £100 fine and 3 points?
    • Yes of course. That's why it says cc:: BIg Motoring World at the bottom. Don't imagine that this solves the issue. It doesn't. He not have to force the finance company and big motoring world to accept the rejection to give your money back. I suggest that you get the letter off tomorrow. And let us know what you hear but on Friday you should then send a threat to the finance company.   Have a look what I have said here about your options and read the whole thread as well.  
    • Been perusing the actual figures on the polls above wondering where the '16% claimed for deform comes from? I understand that there are 'weighted' end results based on secret calculations ...   Probably going to repeat this later, but remember that the ukip/brexit/reform/deform party has ALWAYS had poll speculation FAR better than their actual  performance at elections - by large margins. SO: The labor and Tory votes come largely from simply the people who say they will vote for them - sorted Lab 43% Tory 20%, with maybe another small 1-2% coming from the weightings of the 'not sures' Greens largely get what is declared from 'other' , although with another declared green bit from the 'pressed' question   So as the share of the voting displayed in 'other' granted to reform/deform is around 11%, where does the '16% too often being reported come from? Seems that reform has been granted as beneficiary of effectively ALL the don't knows and wont says, who when pressed didn't actually declare for someone else ... effectively adding 40%+ to their reported polling % - rather strange given their consistent under-performance compared to polling - or perhaps that is the cause of the higher rating eh?   Now I admit the possibility (probability?) of wingers being ashamed of declaring their support for the yuckey lemon end of the spectrum ... but surely  that should affect the 'Torys as well? Maybe the statisticians have simply weighted in that deform wingers are simply more likely to lie?   But - without 'weightings' and assumptions that faragits will get everything that isnt declared as a definite and unequivocal 'not that Piers Morgan' - reform is on around 11% it seems.   Add to that the history of polling a lot less than the hype - and the simple fact that faragit wingers seem to be spread across the country (presumably skulking in their moms spare room despite being 45+) and greens and lib dems seem to be community minded - I think two seats will be an epic result for farage. Hardly the opposition - far more raving wingnut party.   and importantly - Has farage got a home in clacton yet?
    • "as I have no tools available to merge documents, unless you can suggest any free ones that will perform offline merges without watermarking" (which you don't) ... but ok please upload the documents and we'll go from there
    • Please go back and read my message posted at 10:27 this morning @jk2054. I didn't say that I wasn't going to provide documents, only that I will upload them to an online repo that I am in control of, and that I would share links to these. You shall still be able to read and download them no different from if they were hosted here. And, the issue I have is not so much with hosting, but using an online pdf editor to create a multi-page pdf, again I have discussed this that same message.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Driving whilst talking on mobile phone.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5467 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Do the police not need photographic evidence to charge you with talking on a mobile while driving?

Does more than 1 officer need to witness the incident?

Why is the offence code on the ticket different to the offence code the dvla use?

Thanks for any help you could give.

Edited by buddyboy6345789
missed a bit out
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Were You Charged With Talking On A Phone Or Driving With Out Due Care

 

 

Not Getting Into A Debate On This One

You Know The Law,

Hands Free Kits Cost Next To Nothing Now

 

Why Were You Driving And Talking

 

Its A Fair Cop, Just Accept It As A Lifes Lesson

Link to post
Share on other sites

No photographic evidence needed as its considered a serious breach of the law they can also confiscate the phone

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i wasnt talking on the phone, ive got a parrot hands free kit in my car. i had only been driving 20 secs when they pulled me over. i had just pulled away, i had the phone in my hand because i had just taken a call while i was parked.

 

the officer didnt log the exact time he pulled me over so i couldnt use my call register to prove i was not on the phone.

 

im not trying to get out of paying, ive already paid. just want to know if i should have paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya, you were caught. If you had hands free why was mobile in your hand ?. Why were you driving ? just pull into side of road and park up.Is a dam call that important?. Sorry no sympathy with you what so ever. You knowingly broke the law, then have the cheek to come on here and try to get us to solve it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone caught on the phone whilst driving, should have the vehicle scrapped.

 

Well, if they own it, if not jail them ;)

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

let me make it clear fifer (edit), i was not on the phone. i was holding the phone in my hand. i was not on here to get sympathy or to try to get of with it. the fine was paid within 2 hours of getting the ticket.

all i was asking was how does the case stand up as it is 1 persons word against another.

you have made 8 posts fifer(and yes i know i have only made 4) so without being rude, my question was no aimed at you. f(edit)

people drive every day, holding as well as lighting cigarettes, so why is it illegal for me to hold my phone in my hand?

dont worry about replying , i just wanted to make it clear what i was asking.

Edited by freakyleaky
Insults will not be tolerated. Read the rules.
Link to post
Share on other sites

its annoying that all im asking is for some advice and everyones getting all high and mighty, but when someone asks how to find loopholes in paying debt that they have taken out and spent, everyone wants to help.

i got a ticket for driving whilst holding my phone, most people are on here because they have lived above their means and now cant afford to pay off the debt they have got.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone caught on the phone whilst driving, should have the vehicle scrapped.

 

Well, if they own it, if not jail them ;)

 

hear, hear, and for speeding.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so back to the other members question....

 

were you caught for using the phone or driving without due care and attention?

 

my guess is the later as the officer considered the manner of your driving was impaired by 'something' .

 

eitherway it stands in my books, no officer would waste their time issuing you with a ticket 'just' because you had the device in your hand, there must have been another reason that you are not telling us about or are not aware of because it is your normal driving habit [good or bad]

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddyboy, I think the point is that you were holding the phone. It doesnt matter if you were making a call or not. If you are holding something in your hand you are not in full control of the vehicle, they would argue that you should have both hands on the steering wheel.

I dont know this for certain, but the '1 persons word against another', would not stand up, because the '1 person' is an officer of the law, who saw you comitting the alleged offence, and the other person is the alleged offender.

I know somebody who got a warning for just having his arm resting on the door with the window open...he didnt have both hands on the wheel!

And by the way, I think that people who smoke whilst driving should be treated the same way as a mobile phone offence. I smoke, but not whilst driving.

Hope i've helped a bit, jed

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many a case that’s made the papers about people just holding a phone, one where the guy just looked at the time and could prove that no calls or texts had been received or made. Other reports of people getting fines for eating a mars bar etc.

 

There was even a case not long ago, where a woman was in court for holding her phone and sentenced to 3 months. The reason........ she hit and killed a push cyclist at a set of traffic lights. Now i was like many was thinking not long enough etc, until that is, one reporter pointed out that the cyclist had jumped the red light and the police report noted that even if she had not been holding her phone, she could not of avoided the cyclist.Holding the phone had nothing to do with the accident, yet she was still convicted.

So let’s not judge, there is not many of us who hasn`t used a phone, eaten an apple, mars bar etc, Not many that hasn`t turned round to the kids and told them too shut up. Very few of us are whiter than white.

 

The nanny state is starting to go too far these days, there no longer any common sense used by the authorities. I just wonder where its all going to end, soon it will be illegal to sneeze in the streets :confused:.

Edited by cal37
typo( many)
  • Haha 1

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

were you caught for using the phone or driving without due care and attention?

 

 

DWDC is not an offence that can be dealt with by fixed penalty.

 

As the OP got an FPN, it can only have been for using the phone. (which, BTW, is a Construction & Use offence)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My husband reported a stolen van on bank holiday monday he has lost all his tools which are his livelyhood and not one member of the police have even been to see him to take a statement. He was driving last night when someone text him- the pone lit up so he glanced at it and got stopped and issued a ticket. IMO the police are not here to help the public but to hit targets!!!!

Edited by vinegarvera
Link to post
Share on other sites

Were You Charged With Talking On A Phone Or Driving With Out Due Care

 

 

Not Getting Into A Debate On This One

You Know The Law,

Hands Free Kits Cost Next To Nothing Now

 

Why Were You Driving And Talking

 

Its A Fair Cop, Just Accept It As A Lifes Lesson

 

Hand free kits have been shown in studies to be equally dangerous.

Post by me are intended as a discussion of the issues involved, as these are of general interest to me and others on the forum. Although it is hoped such discussion will be of use to readers, before exposing yourself to risk of loss you should not rely on any principles discussed without confirming the situation with a qualified person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My husband reported a stolen van on bank holiday monday he has lost all his tools which are his livelyhood and not one member of the police have even been to see him to take a statement. He was driving last night when someone text him- the pone lit up so he glanced at it and got stopped and issued a ticket. IMO the police are not here to help the public but to hit targets!!!!

 

Spot on Vinegar, the police in theory should be there to protect us and uphold the law (common law that is) but all to often we see this abuse of power. Probably not entirely the police officer's fault as he is probably being pressured from above. I hope your husband is contesting that ticket and good luck to him.

 

Peace and hugs x

This e-book is what got me started http://www.freedomfiles.org/mary-book.pdf

 

This short film opened my eyes

http://www.flixya.com/video/1164060/Money_As_Debt_-_Forex

 

In truth we can find peace and in unity we can cause change

http://www.tpuc.org/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Vinegar, the police in theory should be there to protect us and uphold the law (common law that is) but all to often we see this abuse of power. Probably not entirely the police officer's fault as he is probably being pressured from above. I hope your husband is contesting that ticket and good luck to him.

 

Peace and hugs x

 

Oh he is contesting it!! The officer was on a complete power trip though. Hubby said "Cant believe you are pulling me for this when I have been waiting 2 weeks for the police to help me find my works van" The constable said "How dare you have the audacity to question Merseyside Police" !!!??? WTF?

 

We are honest tax paying citizens who have never ad any police contact in the past and this is how we get treated??

Link to post
Share on other sites

My husband reported a stolen van on bank holiday monday he has lost all his tools which are his livelyhood and not one member of the police have even been to see him to take a statement. He was driving last night when someone text him- the pone lit up so he glanced at it and got stopped and issued a ticket. IMO the police are not here to help the public but to hit targets!!!!

 

 

so because he had his van stolen, you think you are being victimised or they are in the wrong place and should be finding your van?

 

i just glanced at my phone officer.

someone texted me but , but , but

i didnt even press a button. but, but but

 

how many 1000's of other excuses are people going to use or put fwd to to justify their 'special' dispensation to do what they like, without a care for anyone else.

 

a glace can kill a cyclist or a dog or a kid.

 

simple. don't do it, abide by the law.

 

as i said before

 

the only way to stop it is to BAN people.

 

a phone call is not more important than a life.

 

dx

  • Haha 1

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also feel very strongly about this. When driving we should be doing just and only that. I've seen so many people holding mobiles and driving one-handed, it makes me really mad. The question shouldn't really have been asked, Buddy Boy - yes, the police can fine you and yes, they did - because it's really dangerous and people could be killed or injured because you have taken your mind off your driving for a nano second. Don't be surprised that people have jumped on you, no-one could defend such daft actions. Even glancing down at a mobile when a text pops up is dangerous when driving, and no-one is infallible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so because he had his van stolen, you think you are being victimised or they are in the wrong place and should be finding your van?

 

i just glanced at my phone officer.

someone texted me but , but , but

i didnt even press a button. but, but but

 

how many 1000's of other excuses are people going to use or put fwd to to justify their 'special' dispensation to do what they like, without a care for anyone else.

 

a glace can kill a cyclist or a dog or a kid.

 

simple. don't do it, abide by the law.

 

as i said before

 

the only way to stop it is to BAN people.

 

a phone call is not more important than a life.

 

dx

 

 

 

NO, I think they SHOULD have helped look for his van (is that not why I pay my taxes?) They SHOULD NOT have lost the initial report!!! They SHOULD have come to see him when he waited in for two whole days waiting for their advised appointments!!! to name but a few thing they SHOULD have done but DIDN'T!!

 

Apart from the fact that the thieves had our front door key as well!!

 

 

I agree that people should not talk on mobiles!!! But is it against the law to glance at one???? NO!! Should e be banned for glancing at his phone? NO Read the post properly!!! There was NO PHONE CALL!!! He glanced at it because it lit up - no more no less! He NEVER speak or texts while driving as he knows it is dangerous!!

 

If a glance can kill how are people supposed to check speeds, petrol gauges, mirror etc....???

Edited by vinegarvera
Link to post
Share on other sites

'Hand free kits have been shown in studies to be equally dangerous.'

 

'thats true but at the moment they are legal'

 

Are you sure postggj? I dont think they are 'legal', just not 'illegal' to use them. But if it could be proved that an accident was caused by someone loosing concentration during a phone call using a hands free kit, then surely it would lead to the same thing as using a hand held phone.

I stand to be corrected...........jed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...