National Highways has been running AI cameras to detect drivers using a handheld mobile phone since 2021, with the system designed by Acusensus (Heads-Up) and deployed in trailer-mounted units around motorways and A roads. The cameras photograph the driver and use machine vision to flag images that appear to show a phone in hand. Flagged images are reviewed by a human officer before any Notice of Intended Prosecution is issued. The offence is using a handheld mobile phone or similar device while driving, contrary to regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (as amended by the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) (Amendment) (No.4) Regulations 2003 and the 2022 amendment that broadened the definition). It is a section 41D Road Traffic Act 1988 offence with a fixed penalty of £200 and 6 points since 1 March 2022. The 14-day NIP rule under section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 still applies.
Grounds that work for AI mobile phone cameras mobile phone fines
NIP not served within 14 days
Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 requires the Notice of Intended Prosecution to be served on the registered keeper within 14 days of the offence. Compare the offence date on the NIP to the date you actually received it. If you have moved without updating DVLA, the prosecution can rely on service to your old address, so always update DVLA. If your address is correct and the NIP is dated more than 14 days after the offence, write to the prosecuting force stating that any further proceedings are barred under section 1 RTOA 1988. The magistrates' court will dismiss the charge if the prosecution cannot show timely service.
The image does not show a handheld phone
The AI flags possible phone use but a human officer reviews the image before any NIP is issued. Mistakes happen: drivers are sometimes captured holding wallets, water bottles, packets of mints, vape devices, or even their own hand resting near their face. Request the high-resolution colour image and any video clip under the Criminal Procedure Rules disclosure provisions if you elect court. If the object in the image is not clearly a phone, the prosecution cannot prove the offence to the criminal standard. The magistrates apply the criminal burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) and ambiguous images regularly result in acquittal.
The phone was being used hands-free or for a permitted purpose
Regulation 110 only prohibits handheld use of a mobile phone or similar device. Hands-free use is permitted, as is using a phone in a cradle for navigation. The 2022 amendments closed loopholes around scrolling and tapping a phone in your hand, but legitimate hands-free use remains lawful. If your phone was in a cradle or mount, or you were using a hands-free system, document the set-up of your vehicle (photos, dashcam footage, the make and model of the cradle). The defence can also include emergency 999 calls to police, fire or ambulance, which are exempt under regulation 110(5) where stopping is impractical or unsafe.
Driver identification on a shared vehicle
Section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires the registered keeper to name the driver. If the AI camera caught a driver who is not you (because the vehicle is shared, owned by a company, or used by family members), use section 172(4) and identify the actual driver. Reasonable diligence is required where the keeper cannot identify the driver alone. Document the steps you have taken: rota, telematics, fuel card data, conversations. The image itself, in colour and full resolution, often makes identification straightforward: the driver's face is usually visible enough to confirm who was at the wheel.
Camera evidence integrity and Type Approval
AI cameras are a developing technology and not all deployments are fully Type Approved under section 20 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 in the way that traditional speed cameras are. However, the offence of using a handheld phone is not a measurement offence, so the prosecution proves it by photograph rather than calibration data. The integrity of the image chain (custody, timestamps, the location reference) still matters. Request the disclosure of the operating force's evidence pack, including the location of the camera, the time stamp metadata, and the officer review log. Any gap supports a challenge to admissibility.
Got a AI mobile phone cameras mobile phone fine?
Our tool checks your specific notice details and tells you in 60 seconds whether you have grounds to appeal.
Local detail: AI mobile phone cameras
- National Highways began the AI camera trial with Acusensus in 2021 using trailer-mounted Heads-Up units.
- The handheld mobile phone offence carries £200 + 6 points since 1 March 2022 under regulation 110 and section 41D RTA 1988.
- Cameras have been deployed on the M1, M3, M4, M6, M62, A1 and many other roads in rotating trials.
- All flagged images are reviewed by a human officer at the relevant force's central ticket office before a NIP is issued.
- The system also flags driver and front-seat passenger seatbelt non-use as a secondary detection.
- Newly qualified drivers (within 2 years of passing) who receive 6 points face automatic re-test under the Road Traffic (New Drivers) Act 1995.
- The Acusensus system has been used in Australia since 2019 and was cleared for UK trials by the Department for Transport.