# Got a summons for Improper Use of a cell phone!!?



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Tonight I got pulled over by cops in Bayonne, NJ. Had a rider in the backseat. Cop comes over, I give him license and reg. I ask him if I did something wrong. Says, I'll let you know...walks away, comes back a few minutes later, asks for my insurance. 

Then he says open back passenger window. Shines light on African-American female. Asks for her license. She says she doesn't have one, doesn't drive. He says she's not wearing her seatbelt, I could get a ticket for that. Asks how old she is. 17. Says that's illegal and I could get a ticket or something. Then says, I see you're an Uber driver, I'm not going to give you a ticket tonight. Then says "You were touching your cell phone. " I WAS NOT. I never touched my cell phone. How he even could see if I had, is impossible. They didn't have their headlights on in my car. I was going down a local roadway, at normal speed, with a couple of cars ahead of me, with lights. A leisurely pace, with maybe 10 min left to get passenger home.

So he walks back to the car and ten minutes later comes back with my license, reg and insurance and a summons. With a date to appear in court, infraction of 'improper use of a cell phone.' Statute 394-973. No indication of amount. So that was my night. It was around 10 pm when I got puled over. 

Continued on and dropped the passenger off. Then drove to a side street, called Uber, who later said they couldn't help in these matters.

Just really disgusting. He sees a girl in the car and thinks something else? Or drugs or what? And then has to come up with crazy reasons to bust my balls and then give me a summons?? Btw, I'm white, driving in an ethnic area. Guess he's got nothing better to do or to fill their quota??

How can we use the Uber app without touching the phone? If you get a ping while you're driving, how else can you accept it without touching the phone!?? Just ridiculous.

Off to court it is I go, scheduled for mid May.

Anyone ever have to deal with that?


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

There's probably more to the story then you're giving us. Show us a pix of the summons. Touching a digital screen that's attached to a phone holder is no different than touching your radio tuner, touching your automated door locks, touching the bugger buried inside your nose, you get my point. It's probably busting you because you weren't hands-free.
Regarding the 17 year-old pax, I know that Uber has a policy against it, but I don't think its a statute written in law. I could be wrong, you being in NJ and all, so maybe somebody can fill us in.


----------



## Cdub2k (Nov 22, 2017)

Uber will never help in any situation. 
My advice to you is to go to court. I'm sure the dirtbag cop won't be there and your ticket will get thrown out. You did nothing wrong.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

So I guess no dash cam?

What is the law where you are? In my city the only thing you can do while driving is call 911. You're not allowed to touch your phone for any other reason. 

Did you know the pax was underage? That would just be a red flag with Uber, and a good hood reason to keep them out of it anyway. But why would you think they'd help with what is essentially a he said/she said argument anyway?

If the cop said you ran a red light or were speeding, and you disagreed, would you call uber over that? Why give them a reason to get rid of you?


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> In my city the only thing you can do while driving is call 911. You're not allowed to touch your phone for any other reason.


He can tell the judge he was preparing to dial 911 because he feared the pax was only 17 years of age.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Definitely not hiding anything. I had no idea the Pax was 17. 

It was on a Pool, the 3rd rider. (one other was in car). It was dark,she just got in and I drove off. Dropped the 2nd rider, continued on with the girl to her destination. Didn't move my hands to the phone at all, both hands on wheel. It was an easy drive, no turns at that juncture, just driving down the road.

I agree, that if you're touching the screen for a second to accept a ride or switch the navigation it's no different than switching the dial on the radio, etc. But thing is, I wasn't. And how would anyone see that, at night. Impossible. 

I called Uber because I had never had anything like this. If I ran a red light or was speeding, that would have been different and been my fault and nothing to do. But I hadn't done anything wrong.


----------



## daave1 (Oct 24, 2017)

Sucks... Fight that MF'r!


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

kamenliter said:


> a date to appear in court, infraction of 'improper use of a cell phone.' Statute 394-973. No indication of amount.
> Off to court it is I go, scheduled for mid May.


All this for $.70/mile. Where do I sign up?


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> So I guess no dash cam?


My first thought exactly... but... then I thought a dashcam mounted at the windshield, with a second lens looking inside the car, wouldn't be able to capture anything -- assuming the phone is mounted to the dash. This would be a tough situation to cover even if you wanted to...


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

kamenliter said:


> Definitely not hiding anything. I had no idea the Pax was 17.
> 
> It was on a Pool, the 3rd rider. (one other was in car). It was dark,she just got in and I drove off. Dropped the 2nd rider, continued on with the girl to her destination. Didn't move my hands to the phone at all, both hands on wheel. It was an easy drive, no turns at that juncture, just driving down the road.
> 
> ...


But why woukd you expect anything from Uber? It doesn't matter if it was the phone or a red light ticket. It's a ticket. What exactly do you expect from uber other than to put a black mark on your record.

I'm not saying you did it. That's not the point any more than if you did or didn't run a light.

There is NO upside to telling uber, and I just don't get what you were expecting.



KD_LA said:


> My first thought exactly... but... then I thought a dashcam mounted at the windshield, with a second lens looking inside the car, wouldn't be able to capture anything -- assuming the phone is mounted to the dash. This would be a tough situation to cover even if you wanted to...


The cop should have a camera. If he says he saw it, his camera should.

Also, the pax is a potential witness. But good luck for him getting her info if he didn't already.

I would definitely fight this if I was sure I didn't touch the phone. Ask for a jury trial and be a real PITA.


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The cop should have a camera. If he says he saw it, his camera should.
> 
> Also, the pax is a potential witness. But good luck for him getting her info if he didn't already.
> 
> I would definitely fight this if I was sure I didn't touch the phone. Ask for a jury trial and be a real PITA.


Didn't think of that, you're right... so wrapped up lately thinking about protecting myself. But yea, kamenliter don't plead out, fight this BS ticket.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Thanks for your comments. Yeah, I'm definitely going to fight it. For sure. I didn't ask for the girls info..I was thinking of it, but ugh it seemed like too much to ask of a 17 year old who was just trying to get home. No dashcam.

As for what I thought I might get out of it, I don't know. Maybe they've had similar incidents. Hey, I was naive, what can I say, I needed to rant.

I'll know better next time to not call them for anything like that, of course.


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

Don't forget that April is the big N.J. distracted driving crackdown month. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018/03/utext_udrive_upay_police_to_begin_targeting_distra.html

I have no doubt that cops are under pressure to produce results, and this sounds like the officer you encountered was over-reaching here. It sucks that you have to spend time doing so, but I believe that it's worth fighting. Good luck!

P.S. SuzeCB , you always have great insights and advice. Is there anything else you can add here?


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

SibeRescueBrian said:


> Don't forget that April is the big N.J. distracted driving crackdown month. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018/03/utext_udrive_upay_police_to_begin_targeting_distra.html
> 
> I have no doubt that cops are under pressure to produce results, and this sounds like the officer you encountered was over-reaching here. It sucks that you have to spend time doing so, but I believe that it's worth fighting. Good luck!
> 
> P.S. SuzeCB , you always have great insights and advice. Is there anything else you can add here?


On one hand I'm thinking I'm glad I moved out of NJ  but... look where I landed...


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> Tonight I got pulled over by cops in Bayonne, NJ. Had a rider in the backseat. Cop comes over, I give him license and reg. I ask him if I did something wrong. Says, I'll let you know...walks away, comes back a few minutes later, asks for my insurance.
> 
> Then he says open back passenger window. Shines light on African-American female. Asks for her license. She says she doesn't have one, doesn't drive. He says she's not wearing her seatbelt, I could get a ticket for that. Asks how old she is. 17. Says that's illegal and I could get a ticket or something. Then says, I see you're an Uber driver, I'm not going to give you a ticket tonight. Then says "You were touching your cell phone. " I WAS NOT. I never touched my cell phone. How he even could see if I had, is impossible. They didn't have their headlights on in my car. I was going down a local roadway, at normal speed, with a couple of cars ahead of me, with lights. A leisurely pace, with maybe 10 min left to get passenger home.
> 
> ...


I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis - guess this is one example. I'd suggest fighting it - collect evidence, including photos that show your phone is properly mounted, and photos that show that the officer could not see the phone from their car. Otherwise I don't know NJ law, but it's the kind of case you should be able to get dismissed if you go in prepared.

Just FYI - if it's actually illegal to transport unaccompanied minors in your state, I suggest always asking age of young people. It's technically a misdemeanor here in California, so I am very diligent in asking. If they are I hand them a flyer with the law and a list of other Ride-Share companies that can take minors.

And finally, get dash cams!!! If you had dash cams both in and out you'd have prima facia evidence of no wrong doing, and you'd be guaranteed a dismissal (not to mention a possible suit against the officer for racially motivated harassment).

Dealing with police:

Http://YouAndThePolice.com


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

KD_LA said:


> On one hand I'm thinking I'm glad I moved out of NJ  but... look where I landed...


Living and driving in NJ is certainly a challenge. Alas, I have not yet had the pleasure of visiting your area, although it is on my list of places to see at some point.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

SibeRescueBrian said:


> Don't forget that April is the big N.J. distracted driving crackdown month.
> 
> I have no doubt that cops are under pressure to produce results, and this sounds like the officer you encountered was over-reaching here. It sucks that you have to spend time doing so, but I believe that it's worth fighting. Good luck!
> 
> P.S. SuzeCB , you always have great insights and advice. Is there anything else you can add here?


Ah, I didn't know that. I was thinking there was some quota to fill, but it was only the middle of the month. This makes sense. I will be fighting it. Thanks!


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Uber's Guber said:


> Regarding the 17 year-old pax, I know that Uber has a policy against it, but I don't think its a statute written in law. I could be wrong, you being in NJ and all, so maybe somebody can fill us in.


It is specifically illegal in California to take unaccompanied minors unless you as a driver have federal trustline fingerprint BG checks and 10 hours of special training. Each state is different on this matter.


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

DrivingForYou said:


> I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis


By no means are all of them like that, but there are enough to give them that reputation. I've met plenty of excellent police officers in my travels, but woe to anyone who encounters their opposite.


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> Definitely not hiding anything. I had no idea the Pax was 17.
> It was on a Pool, the 3rd rider. (one other was in car). It was dark,she just got in and I drove off. Dropped the 2nd rider, continued on with the girl to her destination. Didn't move my hands to the phone at all, both hands on wheel. It was an easy drive, no turns at that juncture, just driving down the road.
> I agree, that if you're touching the screen for a second to accept a ride or switch the navigation it's no different than switching the dial on the radio, etc. But thing is, I wasn't. And how would anyone see that, at night. Impossible.
> I called Uber because I had never had anything like this. If I ran a red light or was speeding, that would have been different and been my fault and nothing to do. But I hadn't done anything wrong.


Okay, this summons was recorded under statute 39:4-97.3: "Operating Motor Vehicle while Using Cellphone."
I pulled up the statute and I find the statute to be unclear and gray. For this reason, you may want to seek counsel to have the charges dropped. In NJ, a first-time conviction under this statute is a $200 fine. However, your auto insurance provider may tag you as a careless or distracted driver and raise your premium if you are convicted.
Here's what you need to understand: the officer will need to define in court what type of use regarding your cell phone the officer is claiming that you were engaged in. An experienced attorney specializing in NJ traffic law will engage the officer to explain the manner in which you were using a cellphone. Your attorney will pull a copy of your cell phone records and will dispute claims made by the officer, including the point you made earlier that it was impossible for the officer to know exactly what was taking place in your vehicle regarding use of the cellphone in question.
Regarding the 17 year old pax, your defense to Uber is the pax appeared to be much older when you saw them and you had no reason to suspect that the pax was a minor when you picked the pax up.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

SibeRescueBrian said:


> By no means are all of them like that, but there are enough to give them that reputation. I've met plenty of excellent police officers in my travels, but woe to anyone who encounters their opposite.


I heard that NJ cops were pissed at Uber because drunk driver fell 30% so now that can't make as many arrests.

Good God never mind the streets are safer....


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

DrivingForYou said:


> I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis - guess this is one example. I'd suggest fighting it - collect evidence, including photos that show your phone is properly mounted, and photos that show that the officer could not see the phone from their car. Otherwise I don't know NJ law, but it's the kind of case you should be able to get dismissed if you go in prepared.
> 
> Just FYI - if it's actually illegal to transport unaccompanied minors in your state, I suggest always asking age of young people. It's technically a misdemeanor here in California, so I am very diligent in asking. If they are I hand them a flyer with the law and a list of other Ride-Share companies that can take minors.
> 
> ...


You know you're in Joyzee when cops are sipping cawffee at Dunkin Donuts.
You know you're in California when cops are sipping wheatgrass shots at Jamba Juice.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

DrivingForYou said:


> I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis - guess this is one example. I'd suggest fighting it - collect evidence, including photos that show your phone is properly mounted, and photos that show that the officer could not see the phone from their car. Otherwise I don't know NJ law, but it's the kind of case you should be able to get dismissed if you go in prepared.
> 
> Just FYI - if it's actually illegal to transport unaccompanied minors in your state, I suggest always asking age of young people. It's technically a misdemeanor here in California, so I am very diligent in asking. If they are I hand them a flyer with the law and a list of other Ride-Share companies that can take minors.
> 
> And finally, get dash cams!!! If you had dash cams both in and out you'd have prima facia evidence of no wrong doing, and you'd be guaranteed a dismissal (not to mention a possible suit against the officer for racially motivated harassment).


Thanks for the advice. And, After this incident, I do feel I need to get a dash cam. I was looking at ones yesterday. You just never know what could transpire.


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

DrivingForYou said:


> I heard that NJ cops were pissed at Uber because drunk driver fell 30% so now that can't make as many arrests.
> 
> Good God never mind the streets are safer....


The state police treat us very well, and generally appreciate us keeping drunks off the road. Some of the locals however, aren't quite as fond of us. There's a variety of reasons for that ranging from how much the cab companies contribute to the campaigns of local elected officials to the behavior of the drivers themselves in high traffic/high demand areas.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> Thanks for the advice. And, After this incident, I do feel I need to get a dash cam. I was looking at ones yesterday. You just never know what could transpire.


I have a Fovio a119 pointing front, and just a cheap one with IR leads pointing back. Already saved my ass!!

As a bonus I have a growing collection of footage of idiot drivers doing stupid things....



SibeRescueBrian said:


> The state police treat us very well, and generally appreciate us keeping drunks off the road. Some of the locals however, aren't quite as fond of us. There's a variety of reasons for that ranging from how much the cab companies contribute to the campaigns of local elected officials to the behavior of the drivers themselves in high traffic/high demand areas.


I know in some states, local department budgets are tied to arrest rates. There's a reason the USA is the world's biggest prison state - big money.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Uber's Guber said:


> Okay, this summons was recorded under statute 39:4-97.3: "Operating Motor Vehicle while Using Cellphone."
> I pulled up the statute and I find the statute to be unclear and gray. For this reason, you may want to seek counsel to have the charges dropped. In NJ, a first-time conviction under this statute is a $200 fine. However, your auto insurance provider may tag you as a careless or distracted driver and raise your premium if you are convicted.
> Here's what you need to understand: the officer will need to define in court what type of use regarding your cell phone the officer is claiming that you were engaged in. An experienced attorney specializing in NJ traffic law will engage the officer to explain the manner in which you were using a cellphone. Your attorney will pull a copy of your cell phone records and will dispute claims made by the officer, including the point you made earlier that it was impossible for the officer to know exactly what was taking place in your vehicle regarding use of the cellphone in question.
> Regarding the 17 year old pax, your defense to Uber is the pax appeared to be much older when you saw them and you had no reason to suspect that the pax was a minor when you picked the pax up.


For a $200 fine, I guess I'll be my own attorney.

I've had kids younger than 17 in the car...I think I'm going to have to refuse anyone that's being picked up at high school. Once I picked up a 9 or 10 year old and his 6 or 7 year old sister! Had to drive on the highway for 30 min to get them home...crazy...driving precious cargo...too much responsibility! The more you drive..the more you know.


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> Thanks for the advice. And, After this incident, I do feel I need to get a dash cam. I was looking at ones yesterday. You just never know what could transpire.


Get a dual-lens dashcam so you can protect yourself against 1) traffic issues in front of your car, and 2) crazy passenger issues inside your car. I have that (Vantrue N2 Pro), plus a second dashcam looking out my rear window for traffic issues behind me.

But... a dashcam mounted in its "normal" manner (on your windshield) would not have covered you in this situation, because it will not see your phone or your dashboard. See this example 



. Here, this driver has a dual-lens dashcam on his windshield (Vantrue N2), the second lens is covering inside the car but you can see it only covers essentially past the steering wheel only. And this camera model does have a decent wide angle (140 degrees) looking inside.
(Looking out front, it has 170 degrees)


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

KD_LA said:


> Get a dual-lens dashcam so you can protect yourself against 1) traffic issues in front of your car, and 2) crazy passenger issues inside your car. I have that (Vantrue N2 Pro), plus a second dashcam looking out my rear window for traffic issues behind me.
> 
> But... a dashcam mounted in its "normal" manner (on your windshield) would not have covered you in this situation, because it will not see your phone or your dashboard. See this example Here, this driver has a dual-lens dashcam on his windshield (Vantrue N2), the second lens is covering inside the car but you can see it only covers essentially past the steering wheel only. And this camera model does have a decent wide angle (140 degrees) looking inside.
> (Looking out front, it has 170 degrees)


This is true that it doesn't show the phone, but it would have shown that my arm didn't reach in that direction and my hands were on the steering wheel.


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> This is true that it doesn't show the phone, but it would have shown that my arm didn't reach in that direction and my hands were on the steering wheel.


You're right... that it will do. That, along with where you're looking if they question that. So I take back what I said, this should cover our arse for such situations. Thanks for pointing it out!


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> For a $200 fine, I guess I'll be my own attorney.
> I've had kids younger than 17 in the car...Once I picked up a 9 or 10 year old and his 6 or 7 year old sister!


$200 fine is peanuts, but points and subsequent traffic conviction are to be avoided. You're foolish to think you are capable of appearing in a court room without counsel to battle experienced prosecutors and sitting judges who are easliy annoyed.
The fact that you come into this forum admitting to picking up 9 and 10 year old pax is indicative that you are unable to speak properly for yourself.


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

It's not just about the $200 fine. If that stands, the next instance of distracted driving will result in much harsher penalties.

"The Attorney General's office warns that distracted drivers could face fines of $200 to $400 for a first offense and could increase to $800 and three insurance points in subsequent violations."


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> For a $200 fine, I guess I'll be my own attorney.
> 
> I've had kids younger than 17 in the car...I think I'm going to have to refuse anyone that's being picked up at high school. Once I picked up a 9 or 10 year old and his 6 or 7 year old sister! Had to drive on the highway for 30 min to get them home...crazy...driving precious cargo...too much responsibility! The more you drive..the more you know.


Just looked it up, the cop was a lying sack. In New Jersey there is no state law prohibiting transportation of unaccompanied minors (though some municipalities might (sounds unlikely)). The cop probably discovered this when he called it in, and went to the cell phone thing to save face and not look like as ass to his partner or supervisor.

However, you should know it is very much against Uber and LYFT policy to take unaccompanied minors under 18 and YOU CAN BE DEACTIVATED.

Also, under 13??! If the kids under 13 are using the app, they are violating federal COPPA internet laws.

Careful out there!!


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

SibeRescueBrian said:


> It's not just about the $200 fine. If that stands, the next instance of distracted driving will result in much harsher penalties.
> "The Attorney General's office warns that distracted drivers could face fines of $200 to $400 for a first offense and could increase to $800 and three insurance points in subsequent violations."


So true. In NJ, a 3rd conviction will result in a 90 day suspension of driving privileges.
An attorney knowlegable in NJ traffic law knows what defenses are pertinent to winning a case and is able to apply them in a court room setting at the suitable time.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Uber's Guber said:


> $200 fine is peanuts, but points and subsequent traffic conviction are to be avoided. You're foolish to think you are capable of appearing in a court room without counsel to battle experienced prosecutors and sitting judges who are easliy annoyed.
> The fact that you come into this forum admitting to picking up 9 and 10 year old pax is indicative that you are unable to speak properly for yourself.


While I don't know NJ, in Cali there are NEVER prosecutors for traffic. Nor are you allowed a jury trial unless it's a misdemeanor. It's just you, the cop as witness for the state, and the judge.

I have beat tickets. But I was prepared. Evidence and motion for dismissal pre-written before I got to court.

The setting is more like small claims court usually. To prevail, remember that cop testamony is considered prima facie evidence, and so you either need to show it is incomplete per the statute OR attack the evidence as wrong or perjured. The second is harder, But things like dash cam and lots of photos and the right narrative can create reasonable doubt, which really means "it's obvious you're innocent".

Here's an example of how a friend of mine beat his California ticket. Lots of links for help files too.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/andy-somers/i-won-my-case-in-traffic-court/1079056548799715/


----------



## Uber's Guber (Oct 22, 2017)

DrivingForYou said:


> Just looked it up, the cop was a lying sack. In New Jersey there is no state law prohibiting transportation of unaccompanied minors (though some municipalities might (sounds unlikely)). However, you should know it is very much against Uber and LYFT policy to take unaccompanied minors under 18 and YOU CAN BE DEACTIVATED.


Not an court issue because because the written infraction against the driver does not refer to a minor being transported.
True however that Uber's policy says no unaccompanied minors, and this driver who is ready to defend himself in court against experienced court-dwellers can't even close his mouth long enough to defend himself against a rideshare company.


----------



## gambler1621 (Nov 14, 2017)

When I need legal advice...

I trust internet lawyers who drive for Uber.

If you are worried about rhis ticket and intend to keep driving rideshare, then talk to a real attorney. If you can't afford one, then you have some choices to make.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Uber's Guber said:


> $200 fine is peanuts, but points and subsequent traffic conviction are to be avoided. You're foolish to think you are capable of appearing in a court room without counsel to battle experienced prosecutors and sitting judges who are easliy annoyed.
> The fact that you come into this forum admitting to picking up 9 and 10 year old pax is indicative that you are unable to speak properly for yourself.


It was early on, a few weeks into driving. I got a ping for a pickup and it was at a private school. I thought I was picking up a mom with a kid and when I couldn't find the pickup, I called and the mom picked up. She said I was picking up her son and daughter. The school guard let them into my car when I showed their destination on my phone. I really had no idea. It seemed weird, but I thought I was just doing my job and didn't know the rules.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Where was the phone located? We all have a tendency, or a lot of us do anyway, to keep our phones up in the air, blocking the windshield. That location is against the law. However, 3695 specifically allows TNC drivers to use their phones to run the app necessary to drive for a TNC. Without looking at the law itself, and I'm no attorney here, unless the law includes the placement of the phone, you are allowed to use your Uber apps and GPS while you're driving TNC. You're not allowed to sit and text with your friends, or even text with a passenger you're on the way to get. You are allowed to do single taps or swipes.

As to your passenger, there is no law saying that we in New Jersey cannot transport passengers under the age of 18. That is in Uber rules, not law. There has been a lot of argument all over this forum about whether there is insurance coverage or not when you have an unaccompanied minor in the car. You do. That's not what Uber/Lyft's rule is about. They have this rule so that they do not get sued, or if they do, it will go absolutely nowhere with regard to them, when something else goes wrong involving the transport of a minor. The kid is running away, the kid is going to meet some adult three times their age that they met on the internet, the kid is skipping out of school, the kid is sneaking off to a party that the parents don't want them to go to because of drugs or booze or any other reason. Adults are not allowed to help children violate their parents rules, unless it is for the child safety and well-being. Think taking a child to an emergency room after a parent beat the kid up. Anything else can be construed as aiding and abetting the insubordination or delinquency of a minor, or endangering the welfare of a child. That's what Uber doesn't want to get caught up in. By putting it into the Pax TOS, and making it a rule for the drivers, they eliminate themselves from the equation. They make it an argument between the parents and the drivers. The reason it is such a good idea for drivers to not drive minors while it is against the rules is that it's very expensive to hire an attorney to defend yourself against these types of charges. For the cop to say that transporting a seventeen-year-old was illegal, was him beating on his chest. Nothing more, nothing less.

However, he did not give you the ticket for your passenger not wearing a seatbelt. As much grandstanding and intimidation as he may have engaged in, he did you a favor. He did write you the other ticket, therefore he could have written you the ticket for her not having a seatbelt on. In New Jersey this is the Driver's Responsibility, not the passengers'.

Front seat seat belts are a primary ticket, meaning if an officer sees people sitting in your front seat and somebody is not buckled up, they can pull you over specifically for that, and issue the ticket. If, however, you are driving and you are wearing your seatbelt and your only passenger is in the back and they are not wearing a seatbelt, it's a secondary ticket. That means that there has to be another reason that the officer pulls you over, and that that the person in the back seat was not wearing a seatbelt was obvious during the investigation for the primary ticket. I'm not sure if this changes if the passenger in the backseat is a minor or not.

There's also a whole thing about an officer dragging out an investigation for too long, past the reason that they pulled you over. Having you roll down your window was not necessary. That may be why you didn't get that secondary ticket. Since it was not necessary to the investigation of your cell phone, that ticket could have been tossed out easily. I don't know.

Driving in Essex and Passaic counties, I would find myself in all kinds of neighborhoods. Some of them were really bad. Some of those bad neighborhoods also tended to be primarily one ethnicity or another, other than Caucasian. I am Caucasian. The simple fact of the matter is that when I would be in those neighborhoods, I would stick out like a sore thumb just as much as a black driver would in Deal. Is it profiling, Yes. Is it fair? It really depends on the circumstances. In some neighborhoods, a white person driving through is almost always someone looking for drugs or a hooker or some other illegal enterprise. You very well may end up pulled over so the cop can evaluate what are they think that's what you're doing or not.

Now comes another issue that starts its own debate all over this forum. While driving for Uber or Lyft, in the state of New Jersey, we are supposed to display trade dress. This is not because Uber and Lyft think they are pretty decorations for your car. Showing your trade dress shows that you were operating legally, and provide you the protection that you need to touch your phone while driving. If you are not driving professionally, it is against the law for you to touch your phone. It will also help you in making an argument when your Pax has an illegal substance on them and it is found either on them or in your backseat. If the trade dress is displayed properly, you are obviously working, and you are not responsible for whatever your passenger may have snuck into your car, like you would be if one of your friends did. If your trade dress is not displayed properly, technically, you are operating illegally. I believe that this means that if you get a cop with a particular hair up his posterior, you could be ticketed for being an illegal taxi, like we used to, except this time Uber not going to help you. I could be wrong. It just seems to be a reasonable train of thought to me.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> Where was the phone located? We all have a tendency, or a lot of us do anyway, to keep our phones up in the air, blocking the windshield. That location is against the law. However, 3695 specifically allows TNC drivers to use their phones to run the app necessary to drive for a TNC. Without looking at the law itself, and I'm no attorney here, unless the law includes the placement of the phone, you are allowed to use your Uber apps and GPS while you're driving TNC. You're not allowed to sit and text with your friends, or even text with a passenger you're on the way to get. You are allowed to do single taps or swipes.
> 
> As to your passenger, there is no law saying that we in New Jersey cannot transport passengers under the age of 18. That is in Uber rules, not law. There has been a lot of argument all over this forum about whether there is insurance coverage or not when you have an unaccompanied minor in the car. You do. That's not what Uber/Lyft's rule is about. They have this rule so that they do not get sued, or if they do, it will go absolutely nowhere with regard to them, when something else goes wrong involving the transport of a minor. The kid is running away, the kid is going to meet some adult three times their age that they met on the internet, the kid is skipping out of school, the kid is sneaking off to a party that the parents don't want them to go to because of drugs or booze or any other reason. Adults are not allowed to help children violate their parents rules, unless it is for the child safety and well-being. Think taking a child to an emergency room after a parent beat the kid up. Anything else can be construed as aiding and abetting the insubordination or delinquency of a minor, or endangering the welfare of a child. That's what Uber doesn't want to get caught up in. By putting it into the Pax TOS, and making it a rule for the drivers, they eliminate themselves from the equation. They make it an argument between the parents and the drivers. The reason it is such a good idea for drivers to not drive minors while it is against the rules is that it's very expensive to hire an attorney to defend yourself against these types of charges. For the cop to say that transporting a seventeen-year-old was illegal, was him beating on his chest. Nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> ...


Thank you for your detailed response. The phone was located on the air vents next to the steering wheel. Well below the windshield and not an obstruction. Normal cell phone placement for driving. The mention of me 'touching your phone' was only added after he mentioned she had no seatbelt on and after he asked her age. It felt like he was fishing for something to pin on me.

I had the Uber sticker properly placed on the right bottom windshield.

Again, I was driving leisurely, in a not terrible neighborhood, though as a white guy, I would likely be a minority there.

And I never touched the screen or was anywhere near it.

As you said, if you're a driver, you have to be able to touch your screen, to swipe or tap. How else can you accept a ride?

It's the only way to do the job, otherwise, it's impossible. I can't mentally accept pings.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

kamenliter said:


> Thank you for your detailed response. The phone was located on the air vents next to the steering wheel. Well below the windshield and not an obstruction. Normal cell phone placement for driving. The mention of me 'touching your phone' was only added after he mentioned she had no seatbelt on and after he asked her age. It felt like he was fishing for something to pin on me.
> 
> I had the Uber sticker properly placed on the right bottom windshield.
> 
> ...


Uber Implants!


----------



## Stray cat (May 28, 2016)

Interesting thread. Kameniter, I too think you should contest the ticket. 

You said you had had dropped off a pool pax so had no need to touch your phone screen. However, my app still requires me to touch my screen to swipe the “completed trip” tab and a second time to rate the pool pax. Did you touch your phone to do that? Even if you did, I think that’s legal to use the app.

Last month, Philly Police pulled me over for similar pretext. I’m a white guy driving at night alone in West Philly, a mostly black neighborhood. 

Cop saw my trade dress so asks if I drive Uber. I said yes. He claimed there was a report of a guy fitting my description involved in a robbery! Cop asked me to step out and face my car to be searched! I complied. He patted me down. His partner stood behind me while he went inside my car with his flashlight, opened my glove box, etc. Cop thanked me for my cooperation and let me go! No ticket, nothing.

I filed a complaint online with Internal Affairs. They took a signed statement from me at their office, still pending. They have video of the stop but maybe not audio from the cop car cam. 

The police website has a tool called “Crime Mapper” where the public can search how many robberies have been reported in a neighborhood in the past week, etc. I did a search. Zero robberies were reported. 

I think he was on a fishing expedition for drugs or enjoys hassling Uber drivers like us. If you beat your ticket, consider making an Internal Affairs complaint.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

KD_LA said:


> My first thought exactly... but... then I thought a dashcam mounted at the windshield, with a second lens looking inside the car, wouldn't be able to capture anything -- assuming the phone is mounted to the dash. This would be a tough situation to cover even if you wanted to...


An interior dash cam would absolutely show if the driver was reaching out to touch the phone or not. It wouldn't show the actual screen touch, but it would show if there was an arm motion toward the phone or not.

Edit to add: Cops look for dash cams. If you had one, you wouldn't have gotten this ticket.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

Here's how it will work. It basically boils down to your word against the officer. The judge will believe the officer. You will be found guilty. End of story.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Stray cat said:


> Cop saw my trade dress so asks if I drive Uber. I said yes. *He claimed there was a report of a guy fitting my description involved in a robbery! * Cop asked me to step out and face my car to be searched! I complied. He patted me down. His partner stood behind me while he went inside my car with his flashlight, opened my glove box, etc. Cop thanked me for my cooperation and let me go! No ticket, nothing.
> 
> I filed a complaint online with Internal Affairs. They took a signed statement from me at their office, still pending. They have video of the stop but maybe not audio from the cop car cam.
> .


This is one of the most common lies that cops tell citizens as an excuse for an unconstitutional search. And what they did was an unconstitutional violation of your rights. I am very glad to hear you filed an IAD complaint.

An LAPD officer stopped me on a sidewalk and use that same lie. I did show him my ID (I was in my 20s and didn't know any better). I asked if I was free to go and he said yes and I took my ID and left.

I was wearing a DKNY sportcoat, Hugo Boss shirt, Bananna Republic slacks, and Kenneth Cole shoes. Yea, I looked like a robber WTF.?!?

He was Rampart division and I imagine one of the cops that got fired a few months later in the scandal.

At any rate, good to have a dash cam recording audio. There is no expectation of privacy when police are present though some states have anti-citizen laws regarding recording LE. Nevertheless, attorneys will always say that you need to be clear that you do not consent to the search. Simply saying "I object to any search, and any search performed with be under protest" will eliminate consent.

On that note, few common cop lies or statements (I've personally heard these) intended to get you on the defensive.

"you look like a burglary suspect in the area" (lol)
"I smell Marijuana" (not possible at the place/time)
"I stopped you because your license plate light is out" (it wasn't)
"you look like you're on drugs" (lol)
"you can't shoot (photos) here" (public place)
"have you ever been arrested? I can check!!"
"do you want to be arrested?"

LOL

See http://youandthepolice.Com


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

Slim Pete said:


> Here's how it will work. It basically boils down to your word against the officer. The judge will believe the officer. You will be found guilty. End of story.


kamenliter had a witness in the back seat. Of course, if she would have been willing to give her contact info and a statement and he would have had needed to ask for it.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Slim Pete said:


> Here's how it will work. It basically boils down to your word against the officer. The judge will believe the officer. You will be found guilty. End of story.


This is only because officer's testimony is prima facie evidence. If you have "hard" evidence (ie. Video) that shows a different story then you can refute officer testimony. OR if the law is written that requires a certain set of "elements" and the officer failed to state/bring all the elements into evidence, you can move for dismissal on lack of evidence.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Stray cat said:


> Interesting thread. Kameniter, I too think you should contest the ticket.
> 
> You said you had had dropped off a pool pax so had no need to touch your phone screen. However, my app still requires me to touch my screen to swipe the "completed trip" tab and a second time to rate the pool pax. Did you touch your phone to do that? Even if you did, I think that's legal to use the app.
> 
> ...


Actually the pax was still in the car at the time of the stop. I was en route to drop her off (less than 10 min away from her destination). I had no reason to touch the screen as I was driving on a straight road with a few minutes of straight road ahead of me.

That's crazy about your stop. I absolutely think it was the cops looking to find 'something'. Should I beat the ticket (I see another poster says I'll be found guilty) then I would file a report. We'll see. The hearing is not until mid May.



dctcmn said:


> kamenliter had a witness in the back seat. Of course, if she would have been willing to give her contact info and a statement and he would have had needed to ask for it.


I have her first name and the destination address. But I didn't ask her to help me while in the car.


----------



## dctcmn (Sep 21, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> I have her first name and the destination address. But I didn't ask her to help me while in the car.


As much as I'd love to say to contact her, the fact that she's female and 17 would create too high of a risk for the reward. If it were an older person or a dude, it might be different.

Also, I'm totally not criticizing you for not asking her while in the car. It's hard to keep a level head during unwanted LEO interactions.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

dctcmn said:


> As much as I'd love to say to contact her, the fact that she's female and 17 would create too high of a risk for the reward. If it were an older person or a dude, it might be different.
> 
> Also, I'm totally not criticizing you for not asking her while in the car. It's hard to keep a level head during unwanted LEO interactions.


Yeah, I agree, too much to get into with a young girl. And, thanks, yeah it was jus so random and out of the blue a stop. I made sure to ask the rider if she was ok and she said yeah, I'm fine.

Turned out her Step father is an Uber driver and he was ticketed twice for accepting cash from undercover cops, once when dropping off in Manhattan and someone asked for a ride for cash that turned out to be an undercover cop. One of the times, Uber deactivated him for a month.


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

One of two things. Cop (from behind) saw passenger touching her phone and thought it was driver touching their phone in front. Or, probably more this, Cop saw a young female in backseat and assumed the worse, and created a PC reason to pull driver over, so Cop could 'investigate.'

More important, never ever no never contact Uber for anything outside of getting them to pay money they owe you. As for Accepting Trips...sounds like in NJ you will need to pull over and then touch your screen. Put your Uber App into 'Stop Requests' if you need to...sucks, yup.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

UberLaLa said:


> One of two things. Cop (from behind) saw passenger touching her phone and thought it was driver touching their phone in front. Or, probably more this, Cop saw a young female in backseat and assumed the worse, and created a PC reason to pull driver over, so Cop could 'investigate.'
> 
> More important, never ever no never contact Uber for anything outside of getting them to pay money they owe you. As for Accepting Trips...sounds like in NJ you will need to pull over and then touch your screen. Put your Uber App into 'Stop Requests' if you need to...sucks, yup.


yeah, my thought is he saw a girl in the backseat, white guy driving, etc..thought 'gotta investigate.'

And yes, I know now to never contact Uber about stuff like this. Learning curve, my dumb move.

As for stopping to accept requests, that's impossible. Almost all of my requests happen that way, most times with riders in the car. By the time I pulled over the request would have ended. I could be on the highway or somewhere where it's impossible to pull over anyway.

If that were the case and I had to do that, I'd have to quit driving.

I think this is a super isolated incident. If anything like this happened again, I think that would be it for me and driving for Uber.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

dctcmn said:


> kamenliter had a witness in the back seat. Of course, if she would have been willing to give her contact info and a statement and he would have had needed to ask for it.


I think in addition to giving her contact info, she would also need to be willing to actually come to court and waste her entire day.

Merely giving a written statement, even if it is notarized, would not carry any value. In-person presence is needed, so that she can be cross-examined.

Cops would not give a ticket for fiddling with a phone as long as it is attached to the dash.
The minute it's in your hand, they will. Even if it's not placed against your ear.


----------



## YouEvenLyftBruh (Feb 10, 2018)

kamenliter said:


> Tonight I got pulled over by cops in Bayonne, NJ. Had a rider in the backseat. Cop comes over, I give him license and reg. I ask him if I did something wrong. Says, I'll let you know...walks away, comes back a few minutes later, asks for my insurance.
> 
> Then he says open back passenger window. Shines light on African-American female. Asks for her license. She says she doesn't have one, doesn't drive. He says she's not wearing her seatbelt, I could get a ticket for that. Asks how old she is. 17. Says that's illegal and I could get a ticket or something. Then says, I see you're an Uber driver, I'm not going to give you a ticket tonight. Then says "You were touching your cell phone. " ....
> Anyone ever have to deal with that?


something is amiss.

he was going to give you a warning, but then something happens... are you sure you didn't do anything else to turn an officer from 'warning' status to 'ticket' status?


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

kamenliter said:


> yeah, my thought is he saw a girl in the backseat, white guy driving, etc..thought 'gotta investigate.'
> 
> And yes, I know now to never contact Uber about stuff like this. Learning curve, my dumb move.
> 
> ...


However you proceed...let this definitely be a lesson, when Uber puts a button in the driver app that says, _I got a ticket..._they aren't doing it for driver's best interest. VERY shifty company in many ways...


----------



## kc ub'ing! (May 27, 2016)

Cop was fishing! He had no biz talking to your rider! I would have intervened.


----------



## Stray cat (May 28, 2016)

kamenliter said:


> It was on a Pool, the 3rd rider. (one other was in car). It was dark,she just got in and I drove off. Dropped the 2nd rider, continued on with the girl to her destination. Didn't move my hands to the phone at all, both hands on wheel. .


It's where you say you "dropped the 2nd rider" where I thought you would have swiped to complete that ride and tap a rating prior to continuing with the black girl in the backseat. Wasn't sure if the cop could have seen you do that right after dropping off 2nd rider or if he pulled you over long after that. Not that you did anything wrong anyway. I wasn't sure of the time spacing sequence.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> But why woukd you expect anything from Uber? It doesn't matter if it was the phone or a red light ticket. It's a ticket. What exactly do you expect from uber other than to put a black mark on your record.
> 
> I'm not saying you did it. That's not the point any more than if you did or didn't run a light.
> 
> ...


Can't get a jury for a civil infraction


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Folks, if op is recalling accurately then cop saw nothing but a phone on the dash and decided to make something up.

Many cops lie all day long.

Just like you are wearing your seat belt. Cop pulls you over, walks up and asks for ID. While he is watching you buck your belt so you can get your wallet. Two minutes later he says "I just noticed you weren't wearing a seatbelt, I ha really to give you a ticket for that". WTF

Don't get me wrong, 70% of cops are good, hard working, and honest people. 

But that leaves 30% which are lying corrupt sociopathic assholes.

One out of three times you'll get a bad one. Drag when that happens.


----------



## Stray cat (May 28, 2016)

DrivingForYou said:


> This is one of the most common lies that cops tell citizens as an excuse for an unconstitutional search. And what they did was an unconstitutional violation of your rights. I am very glad to hear you filed an IAD complaint.
> 
> An LAPD officer stopped me on a sidewalk and use that same lie. I did show him my ID (I was in my 20s and didn't know any better). I asked if I was free to go and he said yes and I took my ID and left.
> 
> ...


So you know the drill. He came up to my window and says after a few minutes that their suspect is a white male wearing a red coat and blue jeans, which naturally he can see me wearing now. How the F did SuperCop see the colors of my coat and pants as I sat in my car and he sat in his car behind me at 9:45 pm before pulling me over?


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

Stray cat said:


> So you know the drill. He came up to my window and says after a few minutes that their suspect is a white male wearing a red coat and blue jeans, which naturally he can see me wearing now. How the F did SuperCop see the colors of my coat and pants as I sat in my car and he sat in his car behind me at 9:45 pm before pulling me over?


Exactly. I rehearse these lines:

Me: "objection. Am I being detained, and if so why?"

Cop: "I want to ask you some questions"

Me: "I'm not answering any questions, am I free to go?"

Another one that fortunately has never happened to me, if cop arrests you they will often turn on their body audio recorder and say "stop resisting" . It's important to say loud and clear, and repeatedly "I'm not resisting and you're hurting me".


----------



## henrygates (Mar 29, 2018)

If you can't touch your phone then how would anyone drive Uber? It's illegal? How does that even make sense?


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

henrygates said:


> If you can't touch your phone then how would anyone drive Uber? It's illegal? How does that even make sense?


If driver is in a market where the Law does not allow the touching of phone while driving, then driver needs to select 'Stop New Requests' - finish current trip, then while legally parked begin Accepting Trips again. Fairly simple, actually.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

YouEvenLyftBruh said:


> something is amiss.
> 
> he was going to give you a warning, but then something happens... are you sure you didn't do anything else to turn an officer from 'warning' status to 'ticket' status?


No, I didn't do anything odd or say anything weird or defensive. I was very cooperative. I was surprised when he came back with the summons, since he said he wasn't going to give me a ticket. If he gave me a ticket for the seatbelt, it only would have been $46, but the cell phone thing could be $100-$250.

Who knows, just a shmuck feeling his power.



UberLaLa said:


> If driver is in a market where the Law does not allow the touching of phone while driving, then driver needs to select 'Stop New Requests' - finish current trip, then while legally parked begin Accepting Trips again. Fairly simple, actually.


How can you know which area has what law...I'm driving all over Jersey. Impossible to continually stop and start stuff like that...it's ridiculous. I have to have the app going; that's the way I get fares. As I drive, before I drop someone off I'm already getting the request for the next one.

If that were the case, to hell with this shit.



Stray cat said:


> It's where you say you "dropped the 2nd rider" where I thought you would have swiped to complete that ride and tap a rating prior to continuing with the black girl in the backseat. Wasn't sure if the cop could have seen you do that right after dropping off 2nd rider or if he pulled you over long after that. Not that you did anything wrong anyway. I wasn't sure of the time spacing sequence.


Yeah, Unless the cops followed me from where I dropped the second rider. But when I dropped them, I stopped the car and swiped complete trip before I continued on with the third rider.

Just a screwed up situation.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

kamenliter said:


> Tonight I got pulled over by cops in Bayonne, NJ. Had a rider in the backseat. Cop comes over, I give him license and reg. I ask him if I did something wrong. Says, I'll let you know...walks away, comes back a few minutes later, asks for my insurance.
> 
> Then he says open back passenger window. Shines light on African-American female. Asks for her license. She says she doesn't have one, doesn't drive. He says she's not wearing her seatbelt, I could get a ticket for that. Asks how old she is. 17. Says that's illegal and I could get a ticket or something. Then says, I see you're an Uber driver, I'm not going to give you a ticket tonight. Then says "You were touching your cell phone. " I WAS NOT. I never touched my cell phone. How he even could see if I had, is impossible. They didn't have their headlights on in my car. I was going down a local roadway, at normal speed, with a couple of cars ahead of me, with lights. A leisurely pace, with maybe 10 min left to get passenger home.
> 
> ...


Police now have sensors to DETECT cellphone transmissions in moving vehicles.

I believe it is incorporated into some of the newer laser/ radar guns.

Big Brother Loves You.

The World is Quickly becoming a Government Trap.

Its been around for local police since 2014.
Feds have had it much longer.
The " Police Nanny State" has taken your Rights & Privacy !



kamenliter said:


> Tonight I got pulled over by cops in Bayonne, NJ. Had a rider in the backseat. Cop comes over, I give him license and reg. I ask him if I did something wrong. Says, I'll let you know...walks away, comes back a few minutes later, asks for my insurance.
> 
> Then he says open back passenger window. Shines light on African-American female. Asks for her license. She says she doesn't have one, doesn't drive. He says she's not wearing her seatbelt, I could get a ticket for that. Asks how old she is. 17. Says that's illegal and I could get a ticket or something. Then says, I see you're an Uber driver, I'm not going to give you a ticket tonight. Then says "You were touching your cell phone. " I WAS NOT. I never touched my cell phone. How he even could see if I had, is impossible. They didn't have their headlights on in my car. I was going down a local roadway, at normal speed, with a couple of cars ahead of me, with lights. A leisurely pace, with maybe 10 min left to get passenger home.
> 
> ...


Police now have sensors to DETECT cellphone transmissions in moving vehicles.

I believe it is incorporated into some of the newer laser/ radar guns.

Bug Brother Loves You.

The World is Quickly becoming a Government Trap.

Its been around for local police since 2014.
Feds have had it much longer.
The " Police Nanny State" has taken your Rights & Privacy !

They are Rapidly coming for your Right to Drive & Own a Vehicle.
Globally.

Research " Stingray Device" and what Government has been doing with that toy for the last decade.

Go to court. Claim passenger was using cellphone. Tell them yours is used for maps.

Did you know some L.E.D. lightbulbs can be accessed to be a type of listening device to the interrior of your home ?
Without your knowlege.
Without your consent.

They are coming for your mind.
They want to be in it.
To Control it.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> Police now have sensors to DETECT cellphone transmissions in moving vehicles.
> .


The comsonics cell tracking device is a joke. They announced it in 2014, and it still isn't on the market, or even proven to work. Consider these issues:

Cannot differentiate between a driver's phone and a passengers phone. 
Cannot differentiate between phones in other cars in the same line of sight.

Most important: on early 2g/3g networks, voice was circle unit switched and text AND data were packet switched but still all used/shared the same band.

4g and up EVERYTHING is packet switched again on same frequencies so there is NO WAY to reliably differentiate voice, data, and text without decoding, which is impossible as they are secure data streams.

Moreover, on the older networks *text* and *data* were indistinguishable from each other.

Does this sound like a problem for people that might use GPS navigation and a data connection to some company like, say, UBER?

There is cell signals passing between phone and tower all the time even if you are not touching the phone. And what about hands free texting? You can not determine if someone's hands are on the phone just by seeing if there is a stream of data being transmitted.

SO NO you cannot reliably determine if the drivers cell phone is being used for texting to the exclusion of all other phones nearby, and to the exclusion of voice and data.


----------



## UberLaLa (Sep 6, 2015)

kamenliter said:


> ...How can you know which area has what law...I'm driving all over Jersey. Impossible to continually stop and start stuff like that...it's ridiculous. I have to have the app going; that's the way I get fares. As I drive, before I drop someone off I'm already getting the request for the next one.
> 
> *If that were the case, to hell with this shit.*


I think you are getting _The Picture..._



henrygates said:


> If you can't touch your phone then how would anyone drive Uber? It's illegal? How does that even make sense?


Does driving for Uber somehow make that driver impervious to _Distracted Driving? '_Stacked Pings' - Text messages from passengers - Etc. Are dangerous and Uber/Lyft drivers, just like any other driver should pull over and deal with them, rather than put the public at risk by driving distracted...


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

kamenliter said:


> No, I didn't do anything odd or say anything weird or defensive. I was very cooperative. I was surprised when he came back with the summons, since he said he wasn't going to give me a ticket. If he gave me a ticket for the seatbelt, it only would have been $46, but the cell phone thing could be $100-$250.
> 
> Who knows, just a shmuck feeling his power.
> 
> ...


You said you had your trade dress displayed. Your Uber app itself will provide proof that you were on a ride. When you go to court, arm yourself with a copy of 3695 comma with the portion about being able to use your cell phone highlighted. Show that to the prosecutor when you speak to him or her. The charges should be dropped or dismissed. If not, then submit your copy of 3695 to the judge as evidence that your actions were within the law. I would also suggest taking a picture of where you keep your phone. This way, the cop can't say he saw you reaching up into the windshield to do it.

It's actually very important, if you want to continue driving for Uber and Lyft, to fight this. It may take, if the prosecutor is not cooperative, a few trips to court. It's a minor ticket, but it is one that will show up on your DMV report, and three minor incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted fight Uber incidents on your DMV incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted or deactivated by Uber, and deactivated by Lyft.

Do yourself a favor, and do not let the prosecutor talk you into plea bargaining down to a careless driving charge. This will go on your DMV record, even though it carries no points, and will count as an incident. A lot of people will plea bargain because it is easier and faster, but a plea bargain is saying your guilty. You can't argue with someone else saying, "Well, I just did it because...," because then you are admitting perjury. Be careful.


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

Uber's Guber said:


> So true. In NJ, a 3rd conviction will result in a 90 day suspension of driving privileges.
> An attorney knowlegable in NJ traffic law knows what defenses are pertinent to winning a case and is able to apply them in a court room setting at the suitable time.


Holy shit that's more commie than the People's Republic of California.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> You said you had your trade dress displayed. Your Uber app itself will provide proof that you were on a ride. When you go to court, arm yourself with a copy of 3695 comma with the portion about being able to use your cell phone highlighted. Show that to the prosecutor when you speak to him or her. The charges should be dropped or dismissed. If not, then submit your copy of 3695 to the judge as evidence that your actions were within the law. I would also suggest taking a picture of where you keep your phone. This way, the cop can't say he saw you reaching up into the windshield to do it.
> 
> It's actually very important, if you want to continue driving for Uber and Lyft, to fight this. It may take, if the prosecutor is not cooperative, a few trips to court. It's a minor ticket, but it is one that will show up on your DMV report, and three minor incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted fight Uber incidents on your DMV incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted or deactivated by Uber, and deactivated by Lyft.
> 
> Do yourself a favor, and do not let the prosecutor talk you into plea bargaining down to a careless driving charge. This will go on your DMV record, even though it carries no points, and will count as an incident. A lot of people will plea bargain because it is easier and faster, but a plea bargain is saying your guilty. You can't argue with someone else saying, "Well, I just did it because...," because then you are admitting perjury. Be careful.


Thank you, SuzeCB. I'm also going to bring along a print out of the route to the destination to show it was a straight road, with no need to be touching my screen. And I'll make sure to do the other points you brought up.


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

Most cops are cool with uber drivers. But I ran across one bad one two years ago who brought the drug dog and searched my are. It's a hassle, I know.


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> You said you had your trade dress displayed. Your Uber app itself will provide proof that you were on a ride. When you go to court, arm yourself with a copy of 3695 comma with the portion about being able to use your cell phone highlighted. Show that to the prosecutor when you speak to him or her. The charges should be dropped or dismissed. If not, then submit your copy of 3695 to the judge as evidence that your actions were within the law. I would also suggest taking a picture of where you keep your phone. This way, the cop can't say he saw you reaching up into the windshield to do it.
> 
> It's actually very important, if you want to continue driving for Uber and Lyft, to fight this. It may take, if the prosecutor is not cooperative, a few trips to court. It's a minor ticket, but it is one that will show up on your DMV report, and three minor incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted fight Uber incidents on your DMV incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted or deactivated by Uber, and deactivated by Lyft.
> 
> Do yourself a favor, and do not let the prosecutor talk you into plea bargaining down to a careless driving charge. This will go on your DMV record, even though it carries no points, and will count as an incident. A lot of people will plea bargain because it is easier and faster, but a plea bargain is saying your guilty. You can't argue with someone else saying, "Well, I just did it because...," because then you are admitting perjury. Be careful.


Very good writeup. Let me agree, and add (I don't know NJ law, but in general):

DISCLAIMER - I AM NOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY...these are considered lay opinions, intended to mearly recite law...

1) IMO never plea bargain when you have clear evidence in your favor.

2) your _statements_ are not given the full weight of hard evidence. While the police officer's statements ARE primarily facie evidence the defendants statements are not. Therefore you must bring actual evidence and/or impartial witnesses to testify.

In this case some of the many pieces of evidence you might bring would include at least two photos from different angles showing *how the phone is mounted hands free (most important) *, photos showing that the *cop could not see the phone* in its mounted position from his squad car, the *waybill* of the ride that was in progress clearly showing date and time etc., pictures of the *trade dress on the car,* your profile and profile picture proving that you are the Uber driver account in question, dash cam etc etc.

.... Then I was bored today so I started looking up the law.... kamenliter

*Relevant law*

*Legal cites*: you need to do all the legwork (not the judge) to educate the court on what laws apply or don't, and argue from there. You need to present all the related codes to the court. In my brief reading I see a couple code references that seem relevant.

First, the one you were written up for,
*New Jersey Statutes Title 39. Motor Vehicles and Traffic Regulation 39 § 4-97.3
*
Which says (I'm listing only relevant paragraphs) 

_a. The use of a wireless telephone or electronic communication device by an operator of a moving motor vehicle on a public road or highway shall be unlawful *except when the telephone is a hands-free wireless telephone or the electronic communication device is used hands-free*, provided that its placement does not interfere with the operation of federally required safety equipment and the operator exercises a high degree of caution in the operation of the motor vehicle_

_As used in this act:_

_"Hands-free wireless telephone" means a mobile telephone that has an internal feature or function, or that is equipped with an attachment or addition, whether or not permanently part of such mobile telephone, by which a user engages in a conversation without the use of either hand;  provided, however,* this definition shall not preclude the use of either hand to activate, deactivate, or initiate a function of the telephone.*_
​Well there you go. You are SPECIFICALLY Allowed to touch the phone to access functions, activate, etc. 

_"Use" of a wireless telephone or electronic communication device shall include, but not be limited to*, talking or listening to another person on the telephone, text messaging, or sending an electronic message* via the wireless telephone or electronic communication device._​
And while you are using it for Uber, you are NOT doing any of these listed uses.

Then there is also the exemption :
_Nothing in P.L.2003, c. 310 ( C.39:4-97.3 et seq. ) shall apply to the use of a citizen's band radio or two-way radio by an operator of a moving commercial motor vehicle....on a public road or highway._​
And I thought this would be *the* exception, except it only lists CB radio and VHF two way radios. NOT Phones. Because phones are not listed here, there is no general exception for phone use for commercial vehicles - though you could argue that the "_online enabled system" (as below)_ is in fact functioning the same as a two way radio while it is acting as the "_digital network"_ .

*3695*

I then looked at 3695 - there is nothing in there (that I could find) that specifically exempts TNC drivers from the distracted driving law. The term cell phone or wireless phone is not listed. But 3695 does say in section 2 (definitions) :

"_Digital network" means *any online-enabled technology application, service, website, or system* offered or utilized by a transportation network company that enables the prearrangement of rides between transportation network company riders and transportation network company drivers._​
_"Transportation network company driver" or "driver" means a person who receives connections to potential riders and related services from a transportation network company in exchange for payment of a fee to the transportation network company, and uses a personal vehicle to offer or provide a prearranged ride to a rider *upon connection through a digital network *controlled by a transportation network company in return for compensation or payment of a fee._​
These are just definitions of what a driver does with a digital network, not a specific exclusion from the distracted driving statute. But it says the driver must connect through the digital network using an online enabled device.


*Arguments*

So it seems to me the argument would be that we have the exception in _*39 § 4-97.3*_ that shows so long as the phone is mounted in a hands free mount, a hand *may* touch the phone to "*activate, deactivate, or initiate a function of the telephone."*

----_introduce evidence that the phone is mounted hands free. _​
Then that a TNC driver must use "*any online-enabled technology application, service, website, or system" - * such a "system" being the drivers phone, but while driving online with the TNC said phone is repurposed as the "online enabled technology" , and _not being used as a "phone" at that time._

----_introduce evidence of the simple hands free operation of the accept and GPS navigation screens. Perhaps a video showing minimal screen touching - just single swipe or single tap etc. _​
You might additionally argue that while used as connected to the TNC network, you are NOT "*talking or listening to another person on the telephone, text messaging, or sending an electronic message" *Which are the listed, but not exclusive definitions of "use".

Then argue that under 3695 the driver shall use an online enabled technology (the repurposed phone) and that you are in compliance with that law. (introduce appropriate evidence) .

And perhaps the final argument that under 39:4 that commercial vehicles are exempt when using two way radios, and that the phone repurposed as an online network system is acting like a two way radio in that it requires minimal touch by the driver, and sends data in small packets, similar to the way a two way radio is keyed for a short transmission burst. (find some evidence to introduce ) .


*OH ALSO I OBVIOUSLY HAVE TOO MUCH TIME ON MY HANDS TODAY. *

Good luck...


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

kamenliter said:


> Thank you, SuzeCB. I'm also going to bring along a print out of the route to the destination to show it was a straight road, with no need to be touching my screen. And I'll make sure to do the other points you brought up.


That's good one too.

The main thing I'm seeing here is that so long as it's mounted in a hands free mount, you are allowed to touch it to activate and deactivate certain functions per statute 39:4.

Now if the cop lies and says it was in your hand, that's where a dash cam would have been useful. But then introduce photo evidence that he could not have reasonably seen the phone, also with the photos of the mount that you would have no reason to hold the phone. Introduce your Bluetooth earpiece as being connected.

INTRODUCE THE FACT THAT THE OFFICER STOPPED YOU WITH NO VALID REASON (Racism) AND FABRICATED THE CELL PHONE REASON. Introduce that your passenger was a black girl, and that was the real reason for the stop. To make this work you'd want to subpoena the cops history to show a history of racial misconduct.

Okay I'm done got other work to do LOL.

On dashcams:
My dashcam saved me several THOUSAND dollars. It was well worth the $80 investment.


----------



## NoPool4Me (Apr 16, 2018)

DrivingForYou said:


> I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis - guess this is one example. I'd suggest fighting it - collect evidence, including photos that show your phone is properly mounted, and photos that show that the officer could not see the phone from their car. Otherwise I don't know NJ law, but it's the kind of case you should be able to get dismissed if you go in prepared.
> 
> Just FYI - if it's actually illegal to transport unaccompanied minors in your state, I suggest always asking age of young people. It's technically a misdemeanor here in California, so I am very diligent in asking. If they are I hand them a flyer with the law and a list of other Ride-Share companies that can take minors.
> 
> ...


If time permits at some point, would you please list the companies in California that take minors? TIA


----------



## DrivingForYou (Aug 6, 2017)

NoPool4Me said:


> If time permits at some point, would you please list the companies in California that take minors? TIA


I'll do better - here's the flyer I hand out both to minors and to parents with no car seat. One side lists California law, the other side lists the three minor-friendly Rideshare companies. I recommend HopSkipDrive. The flyer prints double sided four to a sheet.


----------



## NoPool4Me (Apr 16, 2018)

DrivingForYou said:


> I'll do better - here's the flyer I hand out both to minors and to parents with no car seat. One side lists California law, the other side lists the three minor-friendly Rideshare companies. I recommend HopSkipDrive. The flyer prints double sided four to a sheet.


Perfect... have it saved on my computer and it printed out perfectly.  Many thanks.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

DrivingForYou said:


> Very good writeup. Let me agree, and add (I don't know NJ law, but in general):
> 
> DISCLAIMER - I AM NOT GIVING LEGAL ADVICE. I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY...these are considered lay opinions, intended to mearly recite law...
> 
> ...


Thank you, DrivingForYou - you're awesome!

You're all awesome. What a great community.


----------



## Dude.Sweet. (Nov 15, 2016)

I grew up in jersey, cops there are the worst, love giving tickets out like candy. If it’s a small township they always show up for court. 

I live in Colorado now, we can text and drive and have an ounce of weed in the car, but the cops here love giving tickets out as well.


----------



## Y0d4 (Feb 6, 2018)

I live in Jersey it’s a 100 something ticket no points I’d just pay the shit going to court for something like that is a waste of time imo


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Y0d4 said:


> I live in Jersey it's a 100 something ticket no points I'd just pay the shit going to court for something like that is a waste of time imo


Well, I have to go to court, there's no fee listed and I have a date written down to appear. If I don't show up, they could send an arrest warrant out for me.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Y0d4 said:


> I live in Jersey it's a 100 something ticket no points I'd just pay the shit going to court for something like that is a waste of time imo


It would show on your background as one of the 3-in-3.


----------



## freddieman (Oct 24, 2016)

DrivingForYou said:


> I've heard NJ cops were worthless bastard nazis - guess this is one example. I'd suggest fighting it - collect evidence, including photos that show your phone is properly mounted, and photos that show that the officer could not see the phone from their car. Otherwise I don't know NJ law, but it's the kind of case you should be able to get dismissed if you go in prepared.
> 
> Just FYI - if it's actually illegal to transport unaccompanied minors in your state, I suggest always asking age of young people. It's technically a misdemeanor here in California, so I am very diligent in asking. If they are I hand them a flyer with the law and a list of other Ride-Share companies that can take minors.
> 
> ...


It's not just police in NJ, it's cops everywhere that practices natzism. They only fight drug dealers so they can get bonus money and redistribution of confiscated goods.


----------



## Y0d4 (Feb 6, 2018)

Isn’t the 3-3 major violations? Damn have to go to court for cellphone ticket wtf now that you mention it I did go to court as well damn I’m a burnout wait so I got a tinted window ticket is that part it is as well? Shit got me worried now


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

Y0d4 said:


> I live in Jersey it's a 100 something ticket no points I'd just pay the shit going to court for something like that is a waste of time imo


I live in NJ too, and not any more. http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018/03/utext_udrive_upay_police_to_begin_targeting_distra.html


----------



## Uber-licious (May 22, 2015)

To the OP, never contact uber if you get a ticket. Nothing good can come of that.


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Uber-licious said:


> To the OP, never contact uber if you get a ticket. Nothing good can come of that.


Thanks, yeah, I've concluded that now.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

Uber-licious said:


> To the OP, never contact uber if you get a ticket. Nothing good can come of that.


Except we all signed that we would, and if you have a ticket you were found Guilty for/pled guilty to, they can deactivate you for that one minor incident, and not wait for the 3-in-3.


----------



## Woohaa (Jan 15, 2017)

how do you get a summons and no ticket? doesn't work that way out here in LA when dealing with a traffic issue


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

Woohaa said:


> how do you get a summons and no ticket? doesn't work that way out here in LA when dealing with a traffic issue


The ticket/summons what have you, doesn't have a code to correspond to any of the violations that are printed on it...so no way of knowing how much to pay. It does have a court date and time, though, to appear before a judge.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

kamenliter said:


> The ticket/summons what have you, doesn't have a code to correspond to any of the violations that are printed on it...so no way of knowing how much to pay. It does have a court date and time, though, to appear before a judge.


The fine may be dependant on past driving record, if the prosecutor got lucky the night before, and/or if what the Judge ate for breakfast or lunch agrees with him/her...


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> The fine may be dependant on past driving record, if the prosecutor got lucky the night before, and/or if what the Judge ate for breakfast or lunch agrees with him/her...


Well, at least my driving record is clean....


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

kamenliter said:


> Well, at least my driving record is clean....


Hire a hooker and a 5-star (HA!) Chef...


----------



## kamenliter (Dec 3, 2017)

SuzeCB said:


> You said you had your trade dress displayed. Your Uber app itself will provide proof that you were on a ride. When you go to court, arm yourself with a copy of 3695 comma with the portion about being able to use your cell phone highlighted. Show that to the prosecutor when you speak to him or her. The charges should be dropped or dismissed. If not, then submit your copy of 3695 to the judge as evidence that your actions were within the law. I would also suggest taking a picture of where you keep your phone. This way, the cop can't say he saw you reaching up into the windshield to do it.
> 
> It's actually very important, if you want to continue driving for Uber and Lyft, to fight this. It may take, if the prosecutor is not cooperative, a few trips to court. It's a minor ticket, but it is one that will show up on your DMV report, and three minor incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted fight Uber incidents on your DMV incidents on your DMV report, weather minor traffic violations or minor accidents your fault or not, will result in being waitlisted or deactivated by Uber, and deactivated by Lyft.
> 
> Do yourself a favor, and do not let the prosecutor talk you into plea bargaining down to a careless driving charge. This will go on your DMV record, even though it carries no points, and will count as an incident. A lot of people will plea bargain because it is easier and faster, but a plea bargain is saying your guilty. You can't argue with someone else saying, "Well, I just did it because...," because then you are admitting perjury. Be careful.


I'm preparing for my court date and have all the information you fine folks have helped with, along with photos, etc, but I'm having trouble finding anything for 3695...what exactly is that?


----------

