Anticipating and distraction
| What we know for certain | Where it goes wrong | What you do | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stopping within the sight distance | The rule is not a speed but an ABILITY: being able to stop within the distance you can see AND that is clear. Two conditions, both required. | Thinking you are safe as long as you are under the limit. In fog, on a bend or over a crest the permitted speed is often already too high for art. 19. | Adapt your speed to what you can see, not to what the sign allows. |
| Holding the device | What is forbidden is HOLDING, not using. The law expressly names phone, tablet and media player — and says “in any case”, so the list is not exhaustive. | Reading it as “calling is banned”. Hands-free calling is not banned; holding a phone in your lap at a red light is — you are still driving. | Device in the cradle or away — holding it is forbidden, including when stationary. |
| What actually raises the risk | According to SWOV it is mainly activities that keep the EYES off the road for long that raise crash risk: dialling, texting, reaching for something in the car, staring at something outside. Rear-end collisions increase the most. | Lumping all distraction together. The distinction is not “phone or no phone” but “how long are your eyes off the road”. Setting a satnav counts; talking to a passenger far less. | Do everything that takes your eyes away for more than an instant before setting off. |
| The effect lingers | SWOV cites an Australian simulator study: AFTER a distracting task ends, detection of peripheral signals and the variation in speed and lateral position remain worse for about 40 seconds, the effect being largest in the first 10. | Thinking you are back the moment you put the screen away. At 100 km/h, 40 seconds is well over a kilometre — and the first ten are the worst. | After an interruption deliberately rebuild: increase your distance and let your speed drop. |
| Compensation is not a solution | SWOV reports an apparent contradiction: a US analysis found no higher crash risk for calling (hands-free or handheld), while simulator studies do show degradation. One possible explanation is compensation — drivers pick calmer moments to call. | Reading this as “calling is safe then”. Compensation works only while the situation stays predictable — and the unexpected is exactly where distraction catches you. | Call only where the situation is predictable, and hang up as soon as that changes. |
| Horn and flashing lights | Permitted SOLELY to avert imminent danger. One purpose, and the law names no second. | Using them to “say thanks” or wave someone through. That is not averting danger, and it is ambiguous: the other driver cannot tell warning from invitation. | Save the horn for imminent danger and otherwise use your hand to thank someone. |
| Following distance | Art. 19 names no seconds and no metres — it requires that you can stop within what you can see and what is clear. | Memorising a fixed figure and not adjusting it in rain or darkness. The rule is an ability, not a distance. | Increase the distance as soon as anything reduces visibility or grip — that is the only way to keep meeting art. 19. |
| Allowing for another driver's mistake | The law obliges you to be able to stop within what is CLEAR. Whether the road stays clear also depends on what others do. | Relying on being in the right. Having priority changes nothing about whether you can still stop. | For every other road user plan for a mistake he might make, and keep room for it. |
The law itself
RVV1990 art. 19RVV1990 art. 61aRVV1990 art. 28RVV1990 art. 3 lid 1SWOV Factsheet Afleiding in het verkeer (juli 2020)
Verified on: