It detects 3/4G signals how can it tell the difference between a mobile phone and a car "phone" data or otherwise, there isn't going to be any difference they behaviour the same.
The false positives are a distraction for those motorists already obeying the law.
Absolutely - what I meant was they have no false positives. They detect the mobile phone signals ( or car SIM card - same signals) and don’t get that wrong. False positive would be if a car with no mobile devices in it was detected as having them in it. 
Perhaps there is a difference in a speech signal and data signal. Don’t know enough about the transmission.
4G (LTE) originally was data only and 3G was/is voice and data. 4G then allowed voice over LTE (VoLTE). Where that isn’t available voice is still over 3G.
It all travels over the frequencies allocated to each technology so a detector sees radio waves of specific frequencies and knows it is 3G or 4G transmission. One type of LTE uses one frequency for transmit and one for receive so that could be identified direction wise. Another type uses the one frequency with send and receive happening at different times.
Direction doesn’t matter too much. The detectors detect the frequencies in the car so as above have no enforcement purpose.
As I asked earlier what is the offence in UK? If it is “using” a phone that is difficult to enforce. In Australia it is an offence to touch a phone. Exception if it is in a commercial holder for GPS etc. Enforcement is simply evidence you touch a phone. Detecting signals is irrelevant.
Sorry cross wires on our part. I meant false positives as in if the outcome is to detect a driver using a mobile phone illegally then in that context a false positive using this equipment would either passenger using one or the car SIM etc.
As you say the only way to attain the use is via viewing a video\still\eyes of enforcing officer.Everything else is a could be ....
the offence seems to be hold a phone while driving
Using a phone or a sat nav when driving
So whilst word “use” is there too, detecting phone frequencies being used is 100% pointless even if it is the driver making a call. The radio frequency detectors can’t detect “illegal use”. Since there is no way to tell the driver is holding a phone. It reads the same way as back home - holding a phone is an offence.
Edit I see there are exceptions allowing hand held use. We don’t have those - no emergency calls allowed and safely parked is a grey area best avoided for us.
Cops are exempt entirely at all times though.
There were already laws in place that would have been sufficient to deal with distracting inappropriate mobile phone use without having an extra law blanket-banning brief conversations.
Particularly where smartphones are concerned, the law that a video screen (other than vehicle instruments) must not be positioned where it is visible to the driver. This bans all texting, facebook updates etc (but might allow use as a satnav) without having to ban voice calls. And it's the viewing of the smartphone screen that's the most distracting use, like the lorry driver video of use as a music library that could have been a non-phone mp3 player and would never trigger the safety warning signs.
I didn't see your ask earlier for the offence but you found it. As @nvingo points out, there were and still are laws that would cover it (dangerous driving and due care and attention I think) but the politicos wanted some crumbs to feed the people. Look what we are doing, are we not great?Now bow before us.
But it requires police to witness the crime first and we are under coppered. You can still get done using the phone "legally" under the old laws I think. Research and experience has shown that the call is a big culprit no matter it is on blue tooth or hand held.
I am still wondering what the difference is though in the transmitted signal voice vs data. On the network, land line that is it was, .3 to 3.4 kHz range was used and I assume it is similar today and over mobile? By the time that is has suffered quantisation and stuffed down some digital algorithm and pipe, it will have a different profile to an app slurping data in bursts perhaps or from an app streaming music at a higher digital rate than speech? Guessing here that that is a difference they can see? Or it is just a fudge up and will get the lot and be a waste.
Detection will be a piece of cake with the right aerial, the phone is essentially a two way radio at heart, it is how the damned things work. How small can they make those aerials though, and if that detector is trapped to a pole, are they in the pole.
Really it's a stupid law, as an amateur radio operator I can use both my handi and mobile rig while driving, little to no different to using a mobile phone, the emergency services can also use their radios which you often see on the Police programs, again no difference as they are then concentrating on the message. Maybe this doesn't take as long as a phone call but it still takes you mind off your driving.