URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 32088--------------------------------------------------
       A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: anon1010101
       Date: August 3, 2024, 7:51 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A bit of a weird one,
       Coworker took the van on a site visit, and on the way back, went
       into the back of someone up a steep hill on the motorway in
       stop/start traffic.
       No dash cam footage, the other person in the car had a
       passenger.
       They phoned up an hour or so later to the office for the
       specific insurance details (that the coworker didn't know, but
       provided the policy provider, our details etc), which were
       passed along to them
       They phoned back another hour or so later and said that their
       passenger now has whiplash and they have a witness that saw the
       coworker on the phone - as far as they implied, no physical
       evidence, but a witness and would be reporting this to the
       police along with their insurance.
       Coworker says that's no true, phone was on his lap with audio
       sat nav directions as the van didn't have a car mount and their
       was a diversion in place when he set off.
       And he went into the back of them because they rolled back
       slightly as they took their handbrake/breaks off to move off.
       How does this work? We've notified insurance, but how will the
       police get involved now normally? Do they just issue a Section
       notice or do they do a full on investigation etc.
       #Post#: 32100--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: The Slithy Tove
       Date: August 3, 2024, 9:01 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sounds like they are trying to put the frightners on your
       coworker. Especially if it was them who rolled back into the van
       rather than the van moving forward into the car (you imply both
       in your description: which was it?). That also seems to be very
       low speed (how fast was it?), making a whiplash claim a bit
       dubious.
       An accusation about mobile phone use without some additional
       evidence is unlikely to go anywhere. Where was this witness
       anyway?
       Wait and see what happens, and whether the police do anything.
       If they do ask about the driver, the correct driver's details
       must be provided. If asked, the coworker can simply deny using
       their phone. One person's word against another.
       P.S. A cynically minded person might see this whole thing as a
       cash-for-crash/insurance scam.
       #Post#: 32102--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: roythebus
       Date: August 3, 2024, 9:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Whiplash injury is very unlikely at speeds under 15mph according
       to a forme Met Police traffic officer I used to know.
       #Post#: 32114--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: anon1010101
       Date: August 3, 2024, 10:28 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It was moving off from stopped traffic speeds apparently, so sub
       5mph easily
       The way he described it was that he crept forward, maybe a bit
       too hasty, and before he realised it they were rolling back
       rather than moving forward so he sharply breaked but it was too
       late and they collided, I'd honestly say the accident may have
       been more his fault than theirs from my pov on how it's been
       described to me, or both slightly at fault, but I know he's more
       worried about the mobile phone claim - apparently it's an
       "independent witness"
       #Post#: 32124--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: mickR
       Date: August 3, 2024, 11:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'd be interested to know where this "independent witness" was
       and how they gave their details to the 3rd party... on a
       motorway.
       #Post#: 32125--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: The Rookie
       Date: August 3, 2024, 12:03 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       A court may decide a phone on a lap is being held for the
       purposes of the legislation as its being ‘held up’ by the
       driver, not supported by anything else, I wouldn’t say that was
       a wholly incorrect decision if they did.
       Maybe trying not to drop the phone impacted their ability to use
       the pedals correctly, doesn’t seem a very safe option to me.
       I’m guessing the other driver though he was on the phone as he
       kept looking down at it, or maybe as he had it in his hand right
       after the collision to get out?
       #Post#: 32130--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: Southpaw82
       Date: August 3, 2024, 12:26 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: The Rookie link ---
       >
       > A court may decide a phone on a lap is being held for the
       purposes of the legislation as its being ‘held up’ by the
       driver, not supported by anything else, I wouldn’t say that was
       a wholly incorrect decision if they did.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Does the regulation not say hand-held?
       #Post#: 32131--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: anon1010101
       Date: August 3, 2024, 12:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       What would the process be, would we more likely recieve a letter
       from the police asking us to declare the driver and
       automatically recieve a letter for whatever they decide, or are
       they more likely to conduct an investigation?
       I know it's all hypophetical, but just looking for some tips on
       what the standard process on all this generally is
       Thanks all
       #Post#: 32139--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: H C Andersen
       Date: August 3, 2024, 1:20 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       If the police wish to act upon any information then they would
       write to the registered keeper.
       Who is the registered keeper, your company(you are writing on
       behalf of a company, yes)  or perhaps this is a lease company?
       If your company receives a notice from the police and you want
       to know how to respond then there's a forum just for you.
       The problem with hypothetical questions is that the thread has
       the capacity to grow and grow and grow...
       While nature abhors a vacuum, forums can thrive on them!
       Have you submitted an accident report to your insurer?
       #Post#: 32144--------------------------------------------------
       Re: A knock and accused mobile phone usage
   DIR By: NewJudge
       Date: August 3, 2024, 3:33 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Southpaw82 link ---
       >
       > Does the regulation not say hand-held?
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I think Andy and I have done this recently.
       The legislation says a device is to be treated as "hand held"
       ...if it is, or must be, held at some point whilst being used.
       So it's my view that if, say, a driver sets up a call before
       beginning to drive, then puts the phone on his lap and begins
       driving, and continues with the call, he has committed an
       offence. The phone meets the definition of hand held and he is
       using it whilst driving. Andy cited a similar situation, but
       instead of placing the phone on his lap before driving, the
       driver locks it in the boot and continued the call after he had
       set off (presumably either on loudspeaker with him shouting, or
       via Bluetooth or something).
       The problem is the legislation does not say the phone has to be
       held in the hand for the offence to be made out. It simply
       defines what a hand held phone is and makes an offence of using
       it whilst driving.
       I imagine it would be for a court to decide the issue and I have
       a suspicion they would be more likely to find against the driver
       in my hypothetical situation than in Andy's.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page