Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Growth in the July to September quarter was weaker than expected, suggesting the recovery is losing steam.View the full article
    • I've also seen it mentioned that the two parts of Ireland becoming closer is concerning HMG.   And that NI still coming under EU rules for trade could be showing that it's better to be in the EU than in Brexit Britain. If people start to think it shows Brexit isn't working, that's going to be a problem for Johnson et al.
    • You won't be able to bring a counterclaim unless you can produce a properly structured assessment of losses or costs or ancillary expenses and you will need to do this by producing at least written assessment et cetera as I have indicated above. Two of them would be much better. A court won't entertain a counterclaim simply based on your own speculation as to your possible costs. I understand very well that your preference would be to write off the entire job including all of the materials that were supplied and for you to recover your outlay for those materials but I think in order to do that you would have to show that you have acquired no value from those materials and once again I think that you would need an expert assessment which explained why the materials were completely wasted and that you would have to start from zero. You can be certain that the claimant will attempt to say that you have received value and in fact that the items which have been supplied or already installed can still be used. I'm afraid that because the attempt to arrange this contract as a cash only agreement inevitably invites the scepticism of the court, I think the court may well be open to consider arguments that the items which have already been supplied are of use to you. If you can get expert confirmation that the supplied materials are now of no use whatsoever, then you will also have to get a quote for uninstalling them and returning them to the claimant. This means that the whole thing is getting even more complicated. I do think that your best interests would be to discuss the matter with your new installer and to see what items which have been already supplied can be used to finish the project – and then to try and deal with the claimant in respect of those on the basis that the case would be withdrawn and everybody would walk away. I think it's time to start abandoning some of this rancour between you because it isn't helping and it won't impress anybody. Don't underestimate the disapproval that will be felt by the court when they get to know about the cash arrangement and this won't be helped by the fact that you then went ahead to try and get receipts. I understand very well that you say that you simply provided money and that in fact you were the purchaser of the items directly from the retailer – but there is no evidence for that and it would be an unusual arrangement and I think the court might express scepticism about that as well. I think we have to bear in mind your credibility in this – and I think that it is rather fragile at the moment. If you came up with a sensible business- like idea about how to put this one to bed and then put it to the claimant and also mention the fact that as he was involved in a cash only transaction, he also might find that he is incurring the displeasure of the court – particularly as he is the claimant, he might feel inclined to try and wrap it all up and bring it to an end. I think the next thing you must do is to get an expert report as I've already suggested above. You will need to do this anyway. If you don't have an expert report then even if you happen to win your argument that there is a breach of contract, the assessment of how much you win will be impossible for the court to decide. The court will absolutely want expert assessments. So you need an assessment as to the work which has been carried out so far and the work needed and costs involved to carry out the job. You need an assessment as to the usability or otherwise of the equipment which has been supplied. At least that for the moment. I don't think it is possible to do much more until you have this information. If you can get the information then we can decide what to do. Obviously I don't know anything about the subject, but I can't imagine that all of the equipment which has been supplied is useless. It could only be useless if you suddenly say that you want an entirely different system of gates – but on that matter, you are bound by your expectation in the contract and you would only be entitled to install a similar system using similar equipment.  
    • I wonder whether part of the UK issue with current NI protocol, is that it is enabling a better trading environment between Ireland and Northern Ireland.     Northern Irish businesses have anticipated import/export issues with Great Britain, so now trade with Ireland or via Ireland.   Apparently reports are that some Northern Irish businesses have seen an increase in trade. It is only businesses that mostly sell British fresh produce that have been affected by border controls  and even then, they could swap to local produce.   Agree that UK Government are using argument with EU as a convenient distraction, but also there must be a worry about increased risk of a united Ireland, as a indirect consequence of Brexit.
    • Fintan O'Toole has an article about the Brexit negotiations and what he thinks HMG's aims are.   Facing chaos and needing a scapegoat, the Tories seek an endless fight with Europe | Fintan O’Toole | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM The EU’s proposals on the Northern Ireland protocol offered what business leaders wanted, but the prime minister prefers failure and grievance  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Ending a call via phone rather than screen while in car


Recommended Posts

Was waiting at traffic lights on a handsfree call.

I ended it by pressing the button on the phone which was in between my lap.

 

There were two community support officers waiting at the traffic light who went onto write something down in their pad while looking towards my number plate.

Am I looking into it too much or can they issue me a fine/points for this? 

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.gov.uk/using-mobile-phones-when-driving-the-law


If it was in your lap and you touched it to end the call, it wasn’t in a hands free holder.

 

Who knows what they were writing down, but if they were noting that you were using your mobile other than hands free : you could receive a penalty.

 

The webpage I’ve cited highlights that this applies even while “just stopped at traffic lights”.

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe (but am happy to be corrected!) that PCSOs can’t offer a FPN in those circumstances.

 

I don’t know if they then report it and the police offer you a FPN, or if they’d have to report you, and take you to court, where either or both could state why they believed the offence to have been committed.

 

6 points, £200 fine (& victim surcharge if it goes to court)

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Would someone be able to confirm. 
 

I went back to the same place as they were waiting outside a house that had been broken into and asked them if they wanted to speak to me as I thought they had taken my number down. They said no. It was the same two community support officers. 
 

Matter finished? 
 

 

Edited by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

You don’t have to keep quoting my posts, especially if you are answering immediately below them.

 

If you are asking if you can “get points through a NIP”: what do you think a S172 / NIP is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry my iPhone kept on auto quoting when I hit reply. 
 

I have no idea what that S172/NIP is. Quick google suggests it’s a notice of intended prosecution. 
 

Surely if they wanted to prosecute the community officer would have told me when I asked him? Can they lie to you? Why would they want to do that? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They may not be lying. They may have taken down the car’s details and not know it was you.

 

Or, they may be making a report and not want to get in an argument with you.

 

Or, they may not have been taking down your car’s details and you are just overthinking all of this.

 

Only time will tell. No one here can tell you for sure.

 

if you had no idea what an NIP is, you might have been better to ask “what’s an NIP” (though googling it, as you have done now was probably a better option) rather than asking “can I get points through an NIP”!

 

If you are that worried about getting points (do you have points already or are you a ‘new driver’?) you may find yourself less stressed if you don’t commit moving traffic offences …….

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few points to note.

 

1. There is talk of issuing a FPN. That is not the procedure for a mobile phone offence. Once the driver has been identified, a Conditional Offer of a Fixed Penalty might be made (if appropriate). That is different to a FPN.

 

2. You will note that such an offer must be made to the driver. Whoever witnessed this alleged offence does not know who was driving. So in order to find out the police must issue a request under s172 of the Road Traffic Act to the Registered Keeper.

 

3. Most importantly, in order to prosecute the driver successfully (should he decline a Fixed Penalty offer) the police must prove that the phone was being used for "interactive communication." This is as a result of the High Court judgement in the case of Ramsey Barreto vs DPP.:

 

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/19-07-31-DPP-v-Barreto-Ref.-CO2702019-Judgment.pdf

 

From your description, they may have some considerable difficulty doing that, so the rest becomes somewhat irrelevant.

 

BTW a "NIP" is a Notice of Intended Prosecution. Where the driver was not stopped at the time of the alleged offence, certain offences require such a notice to be served on either the driver or the Registered Keeper within 14 days. As far as I can remember, a mobile phone offence is not one that does. I'll check and come back if I'm wrong.

 

 

Edited by Man in the middle
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Man in the middle thank you for your reply. That is comforting. 30 years of driving at 70-72mph on the motorway it would have really stung to get 6 points for something as silly as this. Especially as it was through handsfree. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Barreto is currently “good law”, although there are plans to close some of the “loopholes”

 

Indeed Bazz. But it's been over two years since the judgement and nearly a year since the "consultation" was launched. I suppose they must be busy but quite why they need a "consultation" is mysterious. The problem was readily identified by the High Court and it should take a government lawyer a fairly short time to produce an amendment to the statute. I suppose one saving grace is that not many people seem to know of Barreto (yet) which I must say surprises me a little in this day and age. But the DfT needs to get its backside into gear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, axil23 said:

Man in the middle thank you for your reply. That is comforting. 30 years of driving at 70-72mph on the motorway it would have really stung to get 6 points for something as silly as this. Especially as it was through handsfree. 
 

 

 

its not 'silly' regardless of the hands free operation of taking the call , strictly speaking you should not be operating your phone....there are no exceptions....even stationary at traffic lights, the car is running, the key is in the ignition. your past good behaviour by sticking to any speed limit is totally immaterial and has zero bearing upon your actions and oh i should be allowed as i'm a good boy ...usually...... why not  learn how to use your handsfree device properly to terminate a call...might be the answer.

 

your phone should not be in your lap, it should be secured in a holder whereby you do not need to access it..

 

please be careful and thoughtful  for everyone,.

 

 

  • Like 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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...