PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Prosecuted by an unofficial camera, Alleged offence reported from 3rd party dash cam
Dripfedfredd
post Fri, 3 Aug 2018 - 22:15
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 3 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,223



I'm a named driver on the bosses van.

I got 3 points in march for speeding through a traffic light camera (on green) that had sneekily been upgraded to clock speeding.
So 60 on a 40 dual carriageway to which I took the 3 points and a fine as a lesson learnt.

I do about 1000 miles per week most of which is motorways and I now use the van speed limiter on all roads to keep me legal.

2 weeks a go some t#%^ sent in his dash cam footage to the police showing my van closely following a hgv through a red light. Hgv was amber/red and my van was about 1 -2 second red.
His footage was on a next base camera showing time and date.
It was forward facing and it filmed the van passing him on the left in the same direction ( so no driver shot)
My boss says it's me but I don't remember taking that particular route on that day.
And since the speeding fine I've been triple careful so certainly not jumping lights.

Our lock up is 1/4 mile from this incident so both my boss and I both use these roads several times daily in that van.
He's adamant im taking the fine and given job security I'm short of ammunition to fight him.

There is a high council Cctv Dome camera over the junction ( traffic light/roundabout) but it could be looking anywhere.

The police seem to have gone straight for prosecution rather that questioning the accuracy of the footage.
If his date and time are wrong how are we supposed to know who was driving?

Has anybody ever come across 3rd party footage?

Help and advice would be appreciated.

The first notice arrived on the 24/7 so he has 2 weeks to accept , deny or name me.

Thanks
Dave
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Fri, 3 Aug 2018 - 22:15
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
peterguk
post Fri, 3 Aug 2018 - 22:37
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,219
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



So, your boss has received a S.172 request to name the driver?

If so, he is legally obliged to do so regardless of what you or he thinks of the 3rd party video.

If he names you, you will receive your own S.172 request.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 3 Aug 2018 - 22:41
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,177
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Well if his nextbase dashcam is anything like mine, the date, time and location is all recorded automatically based on GPS data, so there's not much scope for it to be wrong. You say the police have gone straight for prosecution but this seems unlikely, for 2 seconds into red the police won't prosecute in court unless you (or your boss) contest. Does your company have any sort of log where you have to sign vehicles out? There is clearly no point in denying the offence outright as there's CCTV footage, so the question is really just who was driving, you or the boss.

The first thing you should do is check your smartphone (if you have one) and see if you have location tracking turned on, this should allow you to confirm that you were driving, or that you were elsewhere. Failing that, check receipts, bank statements, emails, anything that could confirm that you could (or couldn't) have been driving at the time, talk to anyone you would have spoken to on the day, generally try to reconstruct your movements.

If you determine that you were driving, accepting a fixed penalty notice, 3 points and £100 fine, would be the most sensible option. If you can show that you were not driving, share your findings with your boss and if need be you might want to remind him that he could go to prison for falsely naming you as the driver.

This post has been edited by cp8759: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 - 22:42


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 01:26
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40,137
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The police haven’t gone straight to prosecution they have asked the keeper to name the driver.

Right now the keeper has to name the driver, the driver then confirms they were driving and THEN you find out what the police intend to do.

It sounds like you’ve seen the video and know a criminal offence appears to have been committed so some of your vitriol seems a bit misplaced?


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 19:42
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,539
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



How have you seen the footage, have they sent it in to your company as well?

There is no guarantee the police will take action. NIPs are time limited so they tend to be sent out belt and braces no matter what. I know certainly round here the police very openly do nothing about dashcam footage other than "stern words". I guess if they started prosecuting every single one they would be inundated with twatty vigilantes.

Just follow the process, return your S172 on time, and you may find you are filed in the "too much effort" pile.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 20:33
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,177
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 20:42) *
How have you seen the footage, have they sent it in to your company as well?

There is no guarantee the police will take action. NIPs are time limited so they tend to be sent out belt and braces no matter what. I know certainly round here the police very openly do nothing about dashcam footage other than "stern words". I guess if they started prosecuting every single one they would be inundated with twatty vigilantes.

Just follow the process, return your S172 on time, and you may find you are filed in the "too much effort" pile.

There's many discussions on forums across the web where all participants seem to agree amongst themselves that the police won't do anything with dashcam footage, maybe with the exception of dangerous driving etc...

The reality is many forces, including the MET, routinely act on dashcam footage even for minor offences like jumping a red light, using a hand-held mobile phone, crossing a double white or (at least for a couple of forces) even not wearing a seat-belt. After all if the footage is uncontrovertial (i.e. the person reporting it hasn't taken matters into his own hands and hasn't committed any offences himself) it's actually easier to prosecute than with officer testimony.

In a case based on an officer's witness statement, you can end up with someone turning up in court and making a nuisance of himself, saying the officer is mistaken, it wasn't a phone it was an ipod, it's another car that actually committed the offence, the officer misread the number plate, bla bla bla...

With CCTV, the prosecutor just plays the tape where you see the chap chatting away on his hand-held phone, or driving straight through the red light, or whatever else the offence may be, and there isn't really much for the defendant to argue with.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 23:22
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,539
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



What's your evidence for "routinely", where routinely = in a significant number of cases?

The majority I see are for mobile phones. If it was routine to prove red light offences why do the police shell out a fortune for red light cameras when they could just whack a cheap CCTV camera up and have the same "evidence".
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 23:43
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 6,177
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 00:22) *
What's your evidence for "routinely", where routinely = in a significant number of cases?

The majority I see are for mobile phones. If it was routine to prove red light offences why do the police shell out a fortune for red light cameras when they could just whack a cheap CCTV camera up and have the same "evidence".

Well it depends what you consider to be a significant number of cases. Does several hundred per month count?

A cheap CCTV camera wouldn't read number plates so it would be pretty useless for enforcement purposes. To be honest even an expensive CCTV camera would struggle, the cameras used by councils to enforce moving traffic offences in London often use an array including a "normal" camera that catches the offences, and a high FPS infrared camera that reads the number plate, as I understand it this setup costs something like 30k to install, at which point it's not so cheap any more.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 4 Aug 2018 - 23:44
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40,137
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 00:22) *
they could just whack a cheap CCTV camera up and have the same "evidence".

Really? As someone would have to watch the whole session to determine when offences occurred it would be pretty inefficient, that’s why they have expensive cameras that detect an offence and ONLY THEN takes photos.


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Slithy Tove
post Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 07:21
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2,212
Joined: 5 Jan 2012
Member No.: 52,178



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 00:44) *
Really? As someone would have to watch the whole session to determine when offences occurred it would be pretty inefficient, that’s why they have expensive cameras that detect an offence and ONLY THEN takes photos.

The councils do it all the time for other moving traffic offences. Seems to work for them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Monster 900
post Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 10:36
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,381
Joined: 14 Nov 2006
From: Wales
Member No.: 8,984



There are going to be a lot more of these with many police forces actively soliciting for dashcam footage.

This post has been edited by Monster 900: Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 10:42


--------------------
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

Links :- 1. NIP Wizard, 2. Speeding - Likely penalty calculator, 3. How to deal with PPC tickets.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sun, 5 Aug 2018 - 11:55
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,849
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



A CCTV camera isn’t an approved device, so the record can’t be admitted via a s 20 certificate for a start. This discussion is also off topic.


--------------------


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
Dripfedfredd
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 17:18
Post #13


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 3 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,223



I've asked this question previously but being a newbie the have been no replies and I can't even find the message in my own account home page.
In brief.....
Some jobsworth had sent dash cam footage to the police of my van jumping a red light +1 second.
Their 'Nextbase cam' is date time stamped.

Its a company van with the owner and myself named on they insurance.
He says it wasn't him and has quickly put the NIP in my name which arrived today.
I say it wasn't me so were at stalemate but obviously I'm likely to either get points or lose my job.

The initial NIP in his name showed no reference to review evidence nor did it state the exact offence.
He requested the evidence hence the link to the video via a private officiol email with a link to the video.

Its me against him so I need to spin this NIP on its head and fight from a different angle.

My question is:
Whilst the video footage shows without doubt a red light offence but can a dash cam be relied on as absolute evidence if the date and time is wrong.?
We both use the van and both use that route.
Now the NIP is in my name can I question the offence or does it have to be the registered keeper?
If we both dispute the offence and the video date and time can't be confirmed will they go for the registered keeper regardless?

Really need help with this please.
I have spoken to CAB and they say contact a solicitor who deals with traffic offence but I haven't got solicitor money.

Thanks
Dave
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 17:19
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40,137
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Read the replies first and then ask any further questions.

http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=121928&hl=


--------------------
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 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 17:39
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,439
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:18) *
Whilst the video footage shows without doubt a red light offence but can a dash cam be relied on as absolute evidence if the date and time is wrong.?

Probably GPS sourced.

QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:18) *
We both use the van and both use that route.
Now the NIP is in my name can I question the offence or does it have to be the registered keeper?

At the moment the driver identity is being sought. The offence itself cannot be questioned until the driver identity is bottomed-out.

QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:18) *
If we both dispute the offence and the video date and time can't be confirmed will they go for the registered keeper regardless?

There's no presumption that the (registered) keeper was driving.

QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:18) *
The initial NIP in his name showed no reference to review evidence nor did it state the exact offence.

Explain what you mean by 'exact offence' - and did the NIP arrive within 14 days of the alleged offence?


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dripfedfredd
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 17:39
Post #16


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 3 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,223



Thanks 'The Rookie'
I knew I'd posted it and apologies for not responding to those that took the time and replied to me.

So yes I've seen the video and it's clear the can cleared the red light about 1 second after red.
So the video showed the video car stopping sharply on amber red then a hgv on immediate red with my van close behind.

As I mentioned in my first post, I recently got 3 points so I'm on the call now with all aspects of driving. I even throw my phone on the far dash so I can't reach it and it's clear in not in it.
GMP seen pretty keen to get coin in as much as they can do I doubt saying I was driving will result in the offence being forgotten about. More like an easy £100.

My boss shared the video link with me and as far as he's concerned there is no argument..... It was me or me.

We both drive that route once or five times a day depending on work schedule which includes weekends.
The incident allegedly occurred on a Saturday.
On that Saturday I had the Van but was not in that area which is why I dispute the video accuracy.

I hope this answers some of the previous replies.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
peterguk
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 17:41
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 13,219
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Member No.: 14,720



Same red light offence as your other thread?
http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=121928&hl=


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:11
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,439
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:39) *
I even throw my phone on the far dash so I can't reach it...

What sort of phone is it? Some types track your location...


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dripfedfredd
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:13
Post #19


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 3 Aug 2018
Member No.: 99,223



It is a shortened version of the previous message as I received no reply notifications and assumed there were no responses.....lesson learnt and thanks

Thanks JLc.
The NIP (dated 20/7/18) went to boss initially (received 24/7/18) as 'fail to comply with red/ green arrow / lane closure traffic light signals - no detection. It gave a location and date time etc based on the dash cam video 14/7/08
We had no idea what the offence was until his request for evidence and he got a dropbox video link from the ticketing office. Video received on 31/7/18

I received my Nip today dated 07/08/18.

I don't think the NIP ater 14 days would apply even with their delay with evidence?


Its a works JCB thing. Im lucky to get data never mind GPS tracking


This post has been edited by Dripfedfredd: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:15
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jlc
post Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 18:15
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,439
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 19:13) *
'fail to comply with red/ green arrow / lane closure traffic light signals'

That's sufficient for the alleged incident.

QUOTE (Dripfedfredd @ Thu, 9 Aug 2018 - 19:13) *
I don't think the NIP ater 14 days would apply even with their delay with evidence?

Only the 1st NIP applies to the 14 days - which wasn't an issue...


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
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: Monday, 10th December 2018 - 12:02
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.