Dashcam footage

[supermono]

If some do goody do gooder decides to hand in some footage of a bit of driving to the police, does the 14 day NIP rule apply?

Just reading some of that solid lines thread and it seems to me that if the NIP needs to be raised within 14 days, what evidence is there of the camera operator having the right date/time set?

I'm assuming that what amounts to a user configurable setting on the device needs a secondary corroboration so that the exact date and time of the alleged offence can be known.

What does the law say?

[shandyboy]

Ignoring your immature "do goody do gooder" comment, I can state that the footage, along with the witness statement, is all the proof the police need.

It's not like you can drop someone you don't like in it by making something up - either you have footage of them driving irresponsibly or not. Not sure how relevant the time/date truly is, unless you are suggesting that "do gooders" will build an extensive library of poor driving by every car ever so they can at some point in the future report it as a fresh event in the case that the person they don't like buys that car?

If you don't like the idea that someone could "grass" you up, don't drive like a tt.

Edited by shandyboy on Thursday 17th September 12:22

[supermono]

Sadly one man's driving like a tt is another man's normal safe driving, and I believe that amateur dashcam folks tend to be those who drive in a manner that causes frustration to others and hence smoke out bad driving anyway.

One of the many eejit lane hoggers I cruised past on the left sped up and drew alongside with his dashcam to film this death dealing moron once, although to be fair he was probably told to eff off by whichever poor sod had to listen to his rant.

But to reiterate my question in the hope of an answer: Does the 14 day NIP rule apply?

[shandyboy]

I would suspect not - in my particular case, the policeman dealing with it said he was off on holiday for two weeks so not to expect any action until he got back! (unless he was talking about notifying me of updates and that someone else would be writing to the driver, although I didn't get that impression).

They also said unless it was seriously bad, the police wouldn't be able to do anything about it, so an honest mistake or even an inopportune overtake wouldn't prompt them into action - which is understandable I guess - they aren't interested in wasting time pursuing non-events or simple 'bad driving'.

It *is* a shame that we can't report the "38mph everywhere" or MLM brigade though...

[Type R Tom]

supermono said:

Sadly one man's driving like a tt is another man's normal safe driving, and I believe that amateur dashcam folks tend to be those who drive in a manner that causes frustration to others and hence smoke out bad driving anyway.

No it's not, if someone films you doing something they think deserves reporting the police will check it out and make a decision, possibly telling the person who filmed you to do one if there was no offence.

Since when did two wrongs make a right?

[Matt Seabrook]

And if one man's safe driving is reported to the police they will likely tell the dash cam owner to stop wasting their time if it was safe. Just because the dash cam owner is driving like a div doesn't excuse the other road users behaviour. It's the same when overtaking a slow car you still have to stick to the speed limit. It doesn't wash with the BiB to say I was doing it as fast as possible as its safer not to be in the oncoming lane for too long. If your not braking the highway code your have nothing to worry about.

Edited by Matt Seabrook on Thursday 17th September 12:40

[LoonR1]

Type R Tom said:

No it's not, if someone films you doing something they think deserves reporting the police will check it out and make a decision, possibly telling the person who filmed you to do one if there was no offence.

Since when did two wrongs make a right?

Dash cams are permanently recording, so they just capture everything.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but this reporting of others seems to be happening more and more and it's a sad indictment of today's society. Reminds me of the saying "everyone who drives slower than me is a menace on the roads and shouldn't have a licence, whereas anyone who drives faster than me is a menace and shouldn't have a licence".

[Devil2575]

LoonR1 said:

Type R Tom said:

No it's not, if someone films you doing something they think deserves reporting the police will check it out and make a decision, possibly telling the person who filmed you to do one if there was no offence.

Since when did two wrongs make a right?

Dash cams are permanently recording, so they just capture everything.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but this reporting of others seems to be happening more and more and it's a sad indictment of today's society. Reminds me of the saying "everyone who drives slower than me is a menace on the roads and shouldn't have a licence, whereas anyone who drives faster than me is a menace and shouldn't have a licence".

There has always been the ability to report others before dashcams came along so I doubt this has much to do with today's society.

So long as the Police take a sensible approach and only act on events where someone is clearly driving tke a tool then I don't see an issue with it.

[shandyboy]

LoonR1 said:

Dash cams are permanently recording, so they just capture everything.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but this reporting of others seems to be happening more and more and it's a sad indictment of today's society. Reminds me of the saying "everyone who drives slower than me is a menace on the roads and shouldn't have a licence, whereas anyone who drives faster than me is a menace and shouldn't have a licence".

It's only a sad indictment of today's society in the sense that there are morons out there that know the police's resources are so stretched that the chance of getting caught is so slim they can drive dangerously and inconvenience others without giving it a second thought. If there's any come-back for those idiots with the aid of someone's dashcam footage, I don't see a problem.

Now I'm only talking about really bad Russian-dashcam style driving, not AngryDashcam non-event levels... Of which hopefully the police would have enough nouse to put straight in the bin if he ever reported anything.

[Type R Tom]

LoonR1 said:

Dash cams are permanently recording, so they just capture everything.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but this reporting of others seems to be happening more and more and it's a sad indictment of today's society. Reminds me of the saying "everyone who drives slower than me is a menace on the roads and shouldn't have a licence, whereas anyone who drives faster than me is a menace and shouldn't have a licence".

Why? If you had CCTV at your house that picked up a mugging you'd give the footage to the police, why would you not do the same with "crimes" using vehicles? Shouldn’t it be a civic duty to report crime? For the record, I’ve not got one, I’d probably end up incriminating myself but with some of the driving I see on my daily commute into central London, it’s very tempting!

[LoonR1]

Devil2575 said:

There has always been the ability to report others before dashcams came along so I doubt this has much to do with today's society.

So long as the Police take a sensible approach and only act on events where someone is clearly driving tke a tool then I don't see an issue with it.

Up until recently you could report it and then describe it to your mates in the pub and that would normally be the end of it. Now it's on video and uploaded to yourube and social media and the police suddenly become more compelled to do something over what could be minor infringements.

There was a thread called "worth paying the extra insurance?" recently where the OP had reported someone for bad driving and the police had visited them. The offence? They clipped a solid white line at the start of their overtake and I mean clipped the line and that was it.

[speedking31]

Shirley the reason for the 14 day rule is to give the driver a fighting chance of remembering the transgression and hence being able to gather any evidence he needs (including that in his own memory) to mount a defence. Telling you that you are going to be prosecuted for crossing a double white line 6 months ago is hardly fair. In that context I would hope that timely presentation of the case would be necessary.

[Devil2575]

LoonR1 said:

Devil2575 said:

There has always been the ability to report others before dashcams came along so I doubt this has much to do with today's society.

So long as the Police take a sensible approach and only act on events where someone is clearly driving tke a tool then I don't see an issue with it.

Up until recently you could report it and then describe it to your mates in the pub and that would normally be the end of it. Now it's on video and uploaded to yourube and social media and the police suddenly become more compelled to do something over what could be minor infringements.

There was a thread called "worth paying the extra insurance?" recently where the OP had reported someone for bad driving and the police had visited them. The offence? They clipped a solid white line at the start of their overtake and I mean clipped the line and that was it.

People have been visited by the Police on the basis of just a description though. At least with Dash cams it eliminates people just making stuff up or getting worked up about stuff that is enither illegal or unsafe.

Not the Police, but I know people who have been visited by the council on the basis of neighbours making verbal false reports of running a business from home etc. All made up of course and all just out of spite, or dementia in one case where an elderly neighbour kept reporting a lad I worked with for running a laundry from home (he wasn't). In the end he had a chat with his neighbour's son as it was getting silly.

[ikarl]

If the Police were to only accept footage that was completely unedited and would review from start to finish, handing out any punishment they saw fit to the complainee for any of their indiscretions, before then reviewing the specific incident the person is complaining about, I doubt much footage would be handed to the Police.

..let him who is without sin cast the first stone

[HantsRat]

Just for info. A NIP only needs to be issued for the following offences :

Section 2 (dangerous driving)
Section 3 (careless driving/driving without reasonable consideration)
Section 22 (leaving the vehicle in a dangerous position)
Section 28 (dangerous cycling)
Section 29 (careless cycling)
Sections 35 and 36 (disobeying certain traffic signs and police signals)

And under the Road Traffic Regulation Act:
Sections 16, 17(4), 88(7) and 89(1) (speeding offences)
or aiding and abetting any of the above.

[supermono]

Thanks Hantsrat, and further to this if someone filmed me performing one of these stunts would that NIP have to be raised in 14 days? And further, if it wasn't a NIPpable stunt would whatever takes place in lieu of a NIP have a time period too?

[tapereel]

supermono said:

Thanks Hantsrat, and further to this if someone filmed me performing one of these stunts would that NIP have to be raised in 14 days? And further, if it wasn't a NIPpable stunt would whatever takes place in lieu of a NIP have a time period too?

If it hasn't come to the notice of the police inside 14 days they can't issue a NIP inside 14 days. They issue a NIP after it has come to their notice.
While section 1 RTOA requires service of a NIP for some offences, section 2 of the same act has exceptions to that. So NO, you don't have to get a NIP within 14 days of the incident and NO the police don't have a time period that restricts prosecution of evidence from a video as they can't act until they have discovered the actions.

[Zod]

shandyboy said:

I would suspect not - in my particular case, the policeman dealing with it said he was off on holiday for two weeks so not to expect any action until he got back! (unless he was talking about notifying me of updates and that someone else would be writing to the driver, although I didn't get that impression).

They also said unless it was seriously bad, the police wouldn't be able to do anything about it, so an honest mistake or even an inopportune overtake wouldn't prompt them into action - which is understandable I guess - they aren't interested in wasting time pursuing non-events or simple 'bad driving'.

It *is* a shame that we can't report the "38mph everywhere" or MLM brigade though...

Good name for a dashcam vigilante.

[Monkeylegend]

supermono said:

Thanks Hantsrat, and further to this if someone filmed me performing one of these stunts would that NIP have to be raised in 14 days? And further, if it wasn't a NIPpable stunt would whatever takes place in lieu of a NIP have a time period too?

Are you expecting to be reported then

[Eclassy]

http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=3c2_1399488205

I wonder which fits driving without due care and attention more? Completing 2 overtakes safely albeit over a solid white line or coming to a complete stop and parking across the road like in the video above.

It is ludicrous that the driver who did the overtakes gets 8 points and the driver who parked across the road is not even spoken to.