Skip to main content

Stronger penalties needed for texting drivers says IAM

Drivers convicted of causing death by dangerous driving should be given stronger and more consistent penalties, according to road safety charity the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM). An IAM analysis of eleven recent prosecutions involving mobile and smartphone use revealed that the average sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is four-and-a-half years in prison and a disqualification from driving for seven years. In all of the cases analysed, the convicted drivers were found to have lost the
September 18, 2013 Read time: 2 mins
Drivers convicted of causing death by dangerous driving should be given stronger and more consistent penalties, according to road safety charity the 6187 Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM).

An IAM analysis of eleven recent prosecutions involving mobile and smartphone use revealed that the average sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is four-and-a-half years in prison and a disqualification from driving for seven years.  In all of the cases analysed, the convicted drivers were found to have lost their concentration due to using their mobile phone.

A British Social Attitudes survey in 2011 found that 90 per cent of respondents disagreed that it was clearly unsafe to talk on a handheld phone while, yet, since 2006, 750,000 fixed penalties have been issued to drivers for this very reason.

According to the US government website for distracted driving, 3,331 people in the US were killed in 2011 in crashes involving a distracted driver, compared to 3,267 in 2010. An additional 387,000 people were injured in motor vehicle crashes involving a distracted driver, compared to 416,000 injured in 2010.  Ten per cent of injury crashes in 2011 were reported as distraction-affected crashes.

IAM chief executive Simon Best said: “The maximum sentence available to the courts in the UK is fourteen years, so there is still scope for an even stronger road safety message that drivers who kill whilst distracted on their phones will be caught and jailed for a long time.

“The lesson here is obvious: never use your phone while driving. Whether you have a hands free kit or use loudspeaker, it doesn’t matter. Using your phone in any capacity reduces your attention from the task at hand – driving.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • USDoT Intersection Safety Challenge moves to next level
    January 9, 2025
    Derq & Miovision among organisations through to next round of competition
  • Report analyses multiple ITS projects to highlight cost and benefits
    March 16, 2015
    Every year in America cost benefit analysis is carried out on dozens of ITS installations and pilot studies and the findings, along with the lessons learned, are entered into the Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) web-based ITS Knowledge Resources database. This database holds more than 1,600 reports and periodically the USDOT reviews the material on file to draw conclusions from this wider body of evidence. It has just published one such review ITS Benefits, Costs, and Lessons Learned: 2014 Update Re
  • New software could detect when people text and drive
    September 20, 2017
    Engineering researchers at Canada’s University of Waterloo are developing technology which can accurately determine when drivers are texting or engaged in other distracting activities. The system uses cameras and artificial intelligence (AI) to detect hand movements that deviate from normal driving behaviour and grades or classifies them in terms of possible safety threats.
  • German authorities use CB-radio message to reduce accidents in roadworks
    April 8, 2014
    Citizen Band radio is proving useful to prevent accidents in Germany’s roadworks. In common with other German Länder (federal regions) with large volumes of commercial vehicles using their trunk road networks, Bavaria had been experiencing high levels of road traffic accidents (RTAs) involving heavy trucks in the vicinity of minor motorway maintenance sites. This was despite the extensive visual warning regulations published in the German federal road safety audit (RSA) guidelines for the protection of site