PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Is it illegal for my dashcam to show the video when I'm driving
qwertyK
post Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 14:09
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 105
Joined: 17 Jun 2021
Member No.: 113,081



Right I've never heard of this before and it seems ridiculous tbh.
I record videos, with my dashcam mostly of the road but also wanted some shots of me talking. Aware holding a phone is a terrible idea I thought I'd do what seems like common sense and just mount it, but ensure my eyes were fully on the road ahead of me. A police car passed, nothing happened but it got me thinking had I broken the law. As far as I'm aware, I haven't as 1) at no point was I interacting with the device with my hands (it was mounted), 2) I was not distracted by the device.

Some guy I spoke to referenced some law

regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.

Even if you’re not touching the device, if anything is visible on the screen while you are driving - e.g. if you can see yourself - then you are committing an offence under section 109: driving whilst in a position to see a cinematographic apparatus.

You can only use cinematographic apparatus (such as a phone screen) if it is displaying information:

about the state of the vehicle or its equipment;

about the location of the vehicle and the road on which it is located;

to assist the driver to see the road adjacent to the vehicle; or

to assist the driver to reach his destination

So apparently this means what I did was ilelgal but it also means me using a dashcam which I have done every day for the past year is also illegal. What the hell? This seems ridiculous considering Dashcams are a great tool to improve road safety, why is there no disclaimer on dashcams if this is illegal?

Is the law even valid in 2022 because dashcams and mobile phones do not use CRTs. What's the penatly for this, can I be sent an NIP.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 24)
Advertisement
post Sun, 7 Aug 2022 - 14:09
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 12:42
Post #21


Member


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



QUOTE (Foxy01 @ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 12:55) *
........
Can you provide any authority for this? There is no mention of Dashcam in the MOT manual even less so a specified size.


While dashcams are not mentioned specifically, obstructions to the driver's view are.
QUOTE
Defect Category
(a) An obstruction:
(i) within the driver’s field of view that significantly affects his view in front or to the sides outside the swept area of windscreen, minor
(ii) significantly affecting the driver’s view of the road through the swept area of the windscreen or an obligatory external mirror not visible, major


What would significantly affect the view would be subjective and may depend on the examiner and what side of bed that he got out of but sticking a dashcam in the middle of the swept area infront of the driver could easily be construed that way.
I have heard of cars being failed because of an air freshener dangling from the mirror... though never been sure if that is an urban myth.
But it would fall into the category of something obscuring the driver's view

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DWMB2
post Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 12:58
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,363
Joined: 9 Apr 2021
Member No.: 112,205



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:42) *
I have heard of cars being failed because of an air freshener dangling from the mirror... though never been sure if that is an urban myth.

Seems like the sort of story newspaper websites run for clicks on slow news days. In the case of an air freshener that was affecting the driver's view of the road, the tester should in theory do as advised in the MOT Inspection Manual and remove it:
"You can remove items such as a sat nav or air fresheners that obstruct the driver’s view of the road. However, make sure you tell the driver."

The same would presumably apply to poorly placed dashcams


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:14
Post #23


Member


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



QUOTE (DWMB2 @ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:58) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:42) *
I have heard of cars being failed because of an air freshener dangling from the mirror... though never been sure if that is an urban myth.

Seems like the sort of story newspaper websites run for clicks on slow news days.........


Yup, often with headlines that say drivers face £1000 fines.

On the removal side.
I don't disagree that the sensible thing for an inspector to do would be to remove rather then fail.
But surely that they felt the need to remove is indication that the object is deemed to be obstructing the driver's view?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Foxy01
post Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:24
Post #24


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 247
Joined: 4 Mar 2016
Member No.: 82,764



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:42) *
I have heard of cars being failed because of an air freshener dangling from the mirror... though never been sure if that is an urban myth.
But it would fall into the category of something obscuring the driver's view


When the MOT computerisation took place around 2006 the fail criteria for visibility was very clearly defined as items that were attached to the windscreen. In those days they sent out training DVD's to the testers and it was mentioned on one of these. *Did the relevant legislation allow for failing an item not 'attached'? Slowly the whole 'in the drivers view' crept in. It quickly became an issue because the RAC roadside vans amongst others had a dashtop computer fitted which protruded up into the drivers view (At the time an MOT fail). The MOT criteria said fail but the device was type approved. So we get to the 'affecting the drivers vision' version of failure.
The thinking behind the rules was pretty clear but as usual the whole thing became an issue of interpretation. This is probably where the Air freshener story appears to have come from. As a tester you would have been expected to remove the air freshner and issue a Pass after Rectification at Station. However if the vehicle had failed on other items this may not have been possible.

This post has been edited by Foxy01: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 - 13:28
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 12 Aug 2022 - 16:27
Post #25


Member


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



Just taken Shadowfax for his MOT, didn't bother moving the dashcam, pass with no advisories.


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

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 07:07
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