Mobile Phone Driving Offences & AI Cameras: What UK Drivers Need to Know

Using a mobile phone while driving remains one of the most enforced motoring offences in the UK, with penalties that can have immediate and serious consequences for drivers.

In recent years, enforcement has moved beyond traditional roadside policing, with increasing use of advanced technology and AI-assisted camera systems designed to detect potential mobile phone use and other forms of driver distraction.  While these developments are intended to improve road safety, they also raise important questions about how offences are identified, how reliable automated evidence is, and what rights drivers have if they are accused.

Understanding how the law applies in practice and how these new enforcement methods operate has never been more important for motorists facing allegations of mobile phone use at the wheel.

The Law on Using a Mobile Phone Whilst Driving

There are 3 key elements that must be proven to successfully convict a person of using a mobile phone whilst driving – namely:

1. The individual must be “driving” at the material time.
2. The mobile phone must be “handheld” at the material time.
3. The phone must be “in use”.

Driving

An individual is generally considered to be “driving” in law if they have control as to the movement of a vehicle or have the ability to do so.  This means that “driving” does not take on it’s ordinary meaning and does not necessarily require physical movement. You may still be considered driving if:

• You are stopped at traffic lights.
• You are in a traffic queue.
• You are temporarily stationary in traffic.
• The engine is running and you remain in control of the vehicle.

A person will not be considered driving if the vehicle if:

• The vehicle is safely parked.
• The engine is off.
• The journey has concluded, and you no longer have control over the vehicle.

However, context is important and therefore a driver that is “parked” at the side of the road, but their engine is still running, then this may still be regarded as driving.

Handheld

A mobile phone in use will not contravene the legislation unless the device is held at some point.  This therefore means that individuals are complying with legislation if they are using their phone in the following circumstances:

• The device is fixed in a cradle or holder.
• Another individual is holding the phone.
• Using voice commands.

Therefore, physical touching of the device will not always constitute the phone being “handheld”.

Use

The definition of “use” is not subject to interpretation as the legislation specifically lists the circumstances that would be required as use – namely the below:

• Illuminating the screen.
• Checking the time.
• Checking notifications.
• Unlocking the device.
• Making, receiving or rejecting a telephone call.
• Sending, receiving or uploading oral or written content.
• Sending, receiving or uploading a photo or video.
• Utilising camera, video or sound recording functionality.
• Drafting any text.
• Accessing stored data such as documents, books, audio files, photos, videos, films, playlists, notes or messages.
• Accessing an application.
• Accessing the internet.

The above list gives no room for any “use” to fall outside of the legislation. The mere illumination of the phone alone is enough to amount to an offence being committed. A driver who therefore picks up his phone, to merely move it from A to B, will commit the offence if the screen illuminates during that period. The offence therefore does not require physical interaction with the device.

Statistics on Mobile Phone Use

On the 19th March 2026 the Home Office published statistics on police powers and procedures for road traffic matters. This data revealed that between the period of 2023 and 2024 offences relating to the use of a mobile phone whilst driving increased by 10%. During this period 54% of offences were dealt with by Fixed Penalty Notice, 16% by way of a driver retraining course and 30% by court proceedings. Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-powers-and-procedures-roads-policing-to-december-2024/police-powers-and-procedures-roads-policing-to-december-2024

Shift Towards AI & Automated Enforcement

A growing factor in the rise in mobile phone prosecutions is the shift towards more technologically advanced enforcement methods, including the use of AI-assisted and high-definition roadside camera systems.  These systems are being deployed to improve road safety by identifying potentially dangerous driving behaviours more efficiently and consistently than traditional roadside policing alone.  By using automated image analysis to flag suspected mobile phone use for further review, enforcement bodies can detect a wider range of incidents across larger areas and at any time of day.  This increased capability inevitably leads to more alleged offences being identified and processed, which may partly explain the rise in prosecution figures in recent years.

How AI Cameras Detect Mobile Phone Use

An AI camera to detect mobile phone use will continuously capture images of passing vehicles and using AI or other software, will then analyse those photographs to detect potential mobile phone use.  This includes looking for key indicators such as:

• Rectangle objects.
• Positioning of a driver’s hand.
• An illuminated screen.

It is important to note that AI cameras do not “prove” mobile phone use. Instead, they are used to detect potential phone use that can then be flagged for human review. If a vehicle is flagged for potential mobile phone use, this will therefore not automatically lead to prosecution.

Common Evidential Issues & Possible Defences

Upon human review it will be at the determination of the reviewer as to whether a prosecution should be pursued. This involves consideration as to:

1. What the elements of the offence are.
2. Whether the evidence can prove all elements of the offence.
3. If the evidence is enough to convict beyond reasonable doubt.

The above can therefore give rise to a variety of options when seeking to defend the charge such as follows:

1. The “device” or object in the individual’s hand cannot be clearly shown to be a mobile phone.
2. The photograph does not definitely show that the individual was “using” the phone. For example, if the phone is hand

Visibility of Device

If the photograph taken by the camera does not clearly show that the “device” or object in an individual’s hand is a mobile phone, then the Prosecution will struggle to prove all elements of the offence.  The burden to prove the case rests with the Prosecution. It will therefore not be necessary for an individual to positively assert that the object in their hand was not a mobile phone if the Court cannot be sure that it was.

Distinction Between Use & Mere Handheld

Upon review of a photograph taken by a camera, it will be for the reviewing officer to determine if an offence has been committed. In most circumstances, should the officer establish that a mobile phone is present in the image and that the mobile phone is being handheld, the officer will then still need to determine whether the mobile phone is in “use”. This can be difficult to judge based on a single photograph. An officer may consider the below visual indicators that a phone is in use:

1. Movement of the individual’s mouth, suggesting that they are engaged in a telephone call.
2. Fingers being tapped on the screen, suggesting engagement with the device.
3. An illuminated screen.

Presence of the above may be enough to convince the Court beyond reasonable doubt – particularly in absence of any assertion by the individual charged that they were not using the phone or any other explanation.

Penalties for Mobile Phone Offences

Out of Court Settlement

If an individual charged with an offence of using a mobile phone whilst driving and they accept that an offence has taken place, they may be offered a Fixed Penalty by police. This is an out of court settlement.  A Fixed Penalty for using a mobile phone whilst driving will include 6 points on an offender’s licence and a £300 fine. Whilst historically driver improvement courses were offered to individuals charged with such an offence  The above Fixed Penalty should only be accepted if an individual accepts commission of the offence. A Fixed Penalty will not be available to any individuals, who upon acceptance, will accumulate 12 points on their licence within a 3-year period – those individuals must

Court Penalty

Should an offender seek to challenge an offence of this nature or should the matter proceed to court due to the number of points already existing on the licence, the penalty faced is as follows:

1. 6 points.
2. Band B fine (75%-125% of NET weekly income, capped at £1,000 and reduced by up to 33% following a guilty plea).
3. An order to pay prosecution costs (£85-£160 following a guilty plea, £400-£900 following a not guilty plea).
4. An order to pay a victim surcharge (like a court tax – 40% of the fine).

Therefore, whilst the number of penalty points will not increase in taking such an offence to court, the financial penalty will.

Alternative Charges

If the police cannot prove the elements of the mobile phone offence, they may instead consider charging not being in proper control if the driver’s conduct shows they were unable to maintain proper control of the vehicle. The offence states that a person must not drive a motor vehicle on a road if they are in such a position that they cannot have proper control of the vehicle or do not have a full view of the road and traffic ahead. A driver may be reported or charged with this offence where their ability to control the vehicle is impaired by their actions or the way they are using the vehicle, including holding or using a phone (where the more serious offence is not made out).  However, the offences are not interchangeable. A proper control charge is not simply a fallback because a mobile phone allegation is weak. The prosecution must still prove beyond reasonable doubt that the driver was not in a position to have proper control of the vehicle. Acceptance of the above charge by an individual must therefore be carefully considered against the strength of the prosecutions case. If offered by the Prosecution, this may be a sign that they acknowledge the weaknesses in their case. In the same respect, individuals charged may wish to propose the alternative charge to the Prosecution if they feel that their defence is weak.  In most circumstances, the alternative charge is an attractive option to most individuals charged with a mobile phone offence. The penalty for using a mobile phone whilst driving is 6 penalty points. In comparison, the penalty for not being in proper control of a motor vehicle is 3 penalty points.

Future of Enforcement

Looking ahead, enforcement of motoring offences is likely to be increasingly influenced by AI-assisted technology. Although each offence has distinct legal elements and must be proved on its own merits, improvements in camera technology and image analysis are likely to provide enforcement authorities with stronger evidence of distracted driving generally. For motorists, the practical message is clear: using or handling a device while driving is becoming increasingly difficult to conceal, and the safest course is to avoid any activity that could distract attention from the road.

• About
• Latest Posts

Neil Davies

Follow me here at LinkedIn

I am a criminal lawyer with over 25 years of experience and specialising in the defence of Road Traffic (driving) prosecutions and the founder and Senior Partner of Caddick Davies Solicitors.

Latest posts by Neil Davies (see all)

• Mobile Phone Driving Offences & AI Cameras: What UK Drivers Need to Know - July 15, 2026
• Driving Test Delays, Licence Revocation and the New Booking Rules: What Every Learner Driver Needs to Know. - June 30, 2026
• Proposed Changes to Drink & Drug Driving Offences - March 26, 2026