PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Dash cams-Truth or Myth
mickyh7
post Tue, 14 Mar 2023 - 08:18
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 4 Aug 2019
Member No.: 105,088



Hello, not really sure where this should go, so....
I see people speeding every single time I drive. On every type of road.
And I'm reading quite a lot about Police Forces asking for Dashcam footage of poor driving.
Would anyone know how many recordings are sent in, and how many drivers are convicted of Speeding from these images?
It seems if I turn right against a No Right Turn, then I'm done, but speeding looks very grey. How many MPH over the legal limit etc.
How do the Police 'Police' this?
Thanks for reading.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 53)
Advertisement
post Tue, 14 Mar 2023 - 08:18
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:09
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:08) *
QUOTE (Mayhem007 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:02) *
Could a dash cam be used in cases where a driver hogs the middle lane on an empty motorway.

I take it middle lane hogging is now an offence.

Yes. It always has been an offence (careless/inconsiderate driving).

There was a recent case of a woman who sent in dashcam of a guy driving dangerously.
He lost his licence for 12 months
She got a Driver awareness course... as she was lane hogging.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/woman-driver-who...unished-for-la/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:34
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,300
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 13:09) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:08) *
QUOTE (Mayhem007 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:02) *
Could a dash cam be used in cases where a driver hogs the middle lane on an empty motorway.

I take it middle lane hogging is now an offence.

Yes. It always has been an offence (careless/inconsiderate driving).

There was a recent case of a woman who sent in dashcam of a guy driving dangerously.
He lost his licence for 12 months
She got a Driver awareness course... as she was lane hogging.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/woman-driver-who...unished-for-la/

Contrary to that headline, she wasn't 'punished', but 'educated'.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 12:48
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 13:34) *
.......
Contrary to that headline, she wasn't 'punished', but 'educated'.


Yup, time and money to learn not to send in dashcam footage unless you are squeaky clean.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 14:12
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



We had a post on here by /dev/null (I think it was) were he sent in helmet camera footage of poor driving and was threatened with attempting to pervert for withholding the bit of his absolutely crazy driving to try and remonstrate with the driver.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 14:13


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 16:27
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 11:09) *
QUOTE (mickyh7 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 09:10) *
Seems the Police suit themselves.

As the court are the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable/allowable/reasonable, it's hard to see how that has any relevance with respect to the discussion points here.

The court can only deal with what is put before it, if the police doesn't prosecute someone then the court will never deal with it. What the court would have decided if a non-pursued case had come before it is then academic.

So to an extend the police are the arbiters of what is and what isn't acceptable.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 17:14
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 17:27) *
.......
So to an extend the police are the arbiters of what is and what isn't acceptable.


Called discretion.

In that respect the police suit themselves, always have done.

But IMO it would be a far harsher place if they had none or were not allowed to use it.
It may not seem fair to the motorist shouting their mouth off when stopped if someone else "gets away with it" by being polite but that is the way of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 07:06
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 17:27) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 11:09) *
QUOTE (mickyh7 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 09:10) *
Seems the Police suit themselves.

As the court are the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable/allowable/reasonable, it's hard to see how that has any relevance with respect to the discussion points here.

The court can only deal with what is put before it, if the police doesn't prosecute someone then the court will never deal with it. What the court would have decided if a non-pursued case had come before it is then academic.

So to an extend the police are the arbiters of what is and what isn't acceptable.

Yes, but that's not the context MickyH put it in, he was writing it as if Judge Dredd was now in a UK constabulary and deciding the law.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Colin_S
post Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 08:55
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 291
Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Member No.: 59,321



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 14:12) *
We had a post on here by /dev/null (I think it was) were he sent in helmet camera footage of poor driving and was threatened with attempting to pervert for withholding the bit of his absolutely crazy driving to try and remonstrate with the driver.

I have a camera on my crash helmet and have submitted a few clips which the police have gone on to actively pursue. Before submitting them I always take a second look to see how my riding stacks up, especially as I have a digital speedo which shows up quite clearly. There has been a clip or two where I've decided submitting it may not put me in the best of light sleep.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickyh7
post Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 16:27
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 4 Aug 2019
Member No.: 105,088



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 07:06) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 17:27) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 11:09) *
QUOTE (mickyh7 @ Mon, 27 Mar 2023 - 09:10) *
Seems the Police suit themselves.

As the court are the arbiter of what is and is not acceptable/allowable/reasonable, it's hard to see how that has any relevance with respect to the discussion points here.

The court can only deal with what is put before it, if the police doesn't prosecute someone then the court will never deal with it. What the court would have decided if a non-pursued case had come before it is then academic.

So to an extend the police are the arbiters of what is and what isn't acceptable.

Yes, but that's not the context MickyH put it in, he was writing it as if Judge Dredd was now in a UK constabulary and deciding the law.

Yes, exactly, because that's what seems to be happening.
If the law says 14 days, how can the Police suit themselves.
It's either 14 days or it is not.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 18:01
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (mickyh7 @ Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 17:27) *
Yes, exactly, because that's what seems to be happening.
If the law says 14 days, how can the Police suit themselves.
It's either 14 days or it is not.

The law doesn’t say that though.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 29 Mar 2023 - 08:58
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 56,198
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (mickyh7 @ Tue, 28 Mar 2023 - 17:27) *
Yes, exactly, because that's what seems to be happening.
If the law says 14 days, how can the Police suit themselves.
It's either 14 days or it is not.

As SP has said
1/ The law doesn't say that
2/ The courts decide whether it was possible, using reasonable diligence, for it to be served within 14 days and whether therefor a prosecution can continue despite a NIP being served outside 14 days, not the Police, so the Police cannot 'suite themselves' they would have to convince a court that applying the legislation in full the prosecution can continue. AS I SAID IN THE BIT YOU QUOTED!

The relevant section as you haven't seemed able to find it
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/2
(3)Failure to comply with the requirement of section 1(1) of this Act is not a bar to the conviction of the accused in a case where the court is satisfied—
(a)that neither the name and address of the accused nor the name and address of the registered keeper, if any, could with reasonable diligence have been ascertained in time for a summons or, as the case may be, a complaint to be served or for a notice to be served or sent in compliance with the requirement, or
(b)that the accused by his own conduct contributed to the failure.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 - 09:02


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 10-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Wed, 29 Mar 2023 - 09:50
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



The only way I can see that the police are suiting themselves is that they seem to be applying a 14 day limit to videos uploaded to Snap.
When there seems no need for such a limit to be applied.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suziboy
post Wed, 29 Mar 2023 - 11:53
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 258
Joined: 9 Aug 2020
Member No.: 109,369



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 29 Mar 2023 - 10:50) *
The only way I can see that the police are suiting themselves is that they seem to be applying a 14 day limit to videos uploaded to Snap.
When there seems no need for such a limit to be applied.


Maybe forces do this to try and encourage people to submit clips quickly to meet the 'reasonable diligence' requirement.

For example, if a member of the public sends a clip of an incident to Op Snap 3 weeks after the incident occurred (assuming there was no actual accident / collision), then perhaps it could be argued that the submitter did not exercise 'reasonable diligence' in drawing it to the police's attention, and any charges could then be addressed under abuse of process as per the R v R case mentioned earlier in this thread.

Then again, it's often said on here that you should never trust the police's advice on law, so there's that too ....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickyh7
post Thu, 30 Mar 2023 - 17:11
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 4 Aug 2019
Member No.: 105,088



Thanks to all for the many interesting replies.
Just goes to show my ignorance and understanding of the laws.
And for believing some of the things I read on Social Media!
You do a great job Gents.
Many Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 18:45
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here