Twelve months on, and the database has helped police to prosecute over 1,200 drivers but privacy campaigners say the database ‘risks breeding a culture of mistrust and suspicion’ with drivers ‘spying on each other’.
Who’s informing on you?
Prior to the NDCP, each piece of dashcam clip received, took an average of 14 hours to review, process, and decide if an offence occurred because it required officers to handle dashcam evidence as they would eyewitness accounts—involving masses of paperwork and requiring interviews.
Yet, in 2016, North Wales Police discovered a loophole that means officers can treat dashcam and helmet cam footage the same as video from speed cameras—as sole evidence—and prosecute the motorists involved.
People submitted 4,891 clips to the portal in the first 12 months after the launch, which resulted in 1,223 prosecutions.
Nextbase says the NDCP has had a drastic effect on reducing police workload, which frees up critical policing time and saves valuable funds.
Twenty-two different forces use the system so far, with more expected to follow. Officers have direct access and don’t pay a fee for the privilege.
The police forces confirmed they reviewed 50% of the uploaded videos. Half of them ended with the driver either receiving a written warning and points on their licence, or a driving ban.
In 2015, the first person in the UK received a prison term because of dashcam evidence. The video showed the man’s dangerous overtaking—which forced another driver off the road. The Cheshire man received an eight-month sentence.
Officers review each video and send a penalty notice to the offender who can dispute the charge in court.
Offences might include: contravening red traffic lights, contravening solid white lines, dangerous driving, driving without due care and attention, improper control of a vehicle, and mobile phone offences.
A silly idea
But the AA warned that the portal shouldn’t be a substitute for having police on patrol saying in the past, that cuts to traffic policing are hampering efforts to crack down further on driving offences.
Edmund King, President of the motoring group, said, while the group supports dashcam use ‘for safety and insurance reasons’, needing to rely on dashcam coverage to supplement policing is a ‘sad state of affairs’.
King complained of the 20% cut in traffic police in the last decade and stated: ‘If we had more cops in cars, we wouldn’t need to use dashcam vigilantes.’
Silkie Carlo, Director of the privacy and civil liberties non-profit, Big Brother Watch expressed that motorists filming each other all the time ‘may be well-intentioned, but it risks breeding a culture of mistrust and suspicion.’
Describing it as a ‘silly idea’, Carlo said the automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) network ‘that surveils innocent drivers’ captures 40 million photos each day without ‘ordinary people being encouraged to spy on each other’.
Spying is an active endeavour requiring at least some effort. While most of us buy dashcams for insurance and our safety, not to ‘grass up’ other drivers. If we’re driving and somebody causes a collision or a near-miss because of careless behaviour and our dashcam records it, were we ‘spying’?
Other people hold the attitude of, ‘let the police do the job they’re paid to do’ but our officers are struggling to work with reduced numbers. It isn’t their fault, but that of our government. In an ideal world, more police would patrol the streets. In the meantime, do we want them to put their efforts in, say, violent crime instead of motoring offences that technology can pretty well monitor?
Nicholas Lyes, Head of Roads Policy for the RAC, says their research shows law-abiding motorists are becoming ever more ‘fed up with the illegal actions of a minority that get away with tailgating, undertaking, and using handheld mobile phones when driving,’.
The database is for all road users including cyclists, drivers, horse riders, motorcyclists, and pedestrians. It’s simple to use and takes about 15 minutes to write a short description of the incident, answer a supporting questionnaire, and upload the clip. You’ll find the website here.
I believe that by allowing the general public to submit dashcam footage of dangerous & illegal driving might make the perpetrator think twice before committing the offence. That in itself will make the roads safer.
One Problem with this system is it is not available in Scotland, and yes we do get those similar idiot drivers just like you get in England and Wales.
Scotland needs it. Can’t understand why they don’t have it. As you said we have the same idiots up here.
Northern Ireland is also excluded, and our idiot drivers are just as big as idiots as the rest of them!
AND Scotland wants to have independence…………..
GDP of Scotland is based on the price of oil. Scotland would be bankrupt without funding from England
Scotland would be bankrupt without funding from England
Enough already with your Scotland hating, hard-done by “Little Englander” nonsense. Take it off to a suitable site where all the other closet racists go to big themselves up!
Agreed. The oil industry is in decline but ignorant people fail to realise Scotland’s exports mainly exit via English ports so are counted as English. Unfortunately many people rarely get facts right before having an opinion and making erroneous sweeping statements.
Ignorance is a breeding ground for hatred.
And your point is?……..
“law-abiding motorists are becoming ever more ‘fed up with the illegal actions of a minority that get away with tailgating, undertaking?” There should be no reason to be undertaken unless the “law abiding citizens,” were sitting in an outside lane they shouldn’t be in. I though that had become law?
We were “undertaken” by a motorcyclist just last week. We were in the middle lane, driving faster than the people in the inside lane, and the outside lane was empty, but the motorcyclist just decided to cut up the inside and swerve back out in front of us, making our driver brake.
Must agree. I’m not a fan of do Goode’s vigilantes, but motorcyclists and cyclists for that matter are a law unto themselves.
With over 1200 car drivers being caught you say motorcyclist and cyclists are a law unto themselves !!
Typical comment from an ignorant car driver.
You will be saying cyclists don’t pay road tax next.
To be undertaken means you were driving with an empty lane to your left!
You should always drive in the left-hand lane when the road ahead is clear. If you are overtaking a number of slower-moving vehicles, you should return to the left-hand lane as soon as you are safely past.
Only one thinking men rest driving 50 miles an hour on right hand line and complain for being undertaken, while they commiting an offence at first place and then flashing theirs lights poor drivers
Your point is clear and good I fully agree keep to the left,
BUT unfortunately there are a few crazie’s who think that the safety gap that you try to maintain in front of you as a safe stopping DISTANCE at higher motorway speeds is an area they cannot bare to see, even though you are actually passing the traffic on your left, if a small gap appears on the left of you it’s stupid and dangerous for the crazy behind to zip into it in order to undertake just to get into my safety stopping DISTANCE gap! AND ILLEGAL IN EVERY WAY WHEN I’M MAKING NORMAL PROGRESS AT THE SPEED ALLOWED 70 MPH WITH OTHER CARS IN FRONT OF ME DOING THE SAME!
THIS IS AN INSTANCE WHERE I’LL BE SENDING IN VIDEO EVIDENCE FOR POLICE TO PROSECUTE! I HAVE ALL AROUND VIDEO CAMERA SYSTEM.
“Stopping distance gap”?
No; it is a 2 second gap- 4 in the wet.
Frankly it’s little wonder you experience being undertaken. I don’t because I move over because I know I’m not in a supertanker.
Unless of course you are making a right-hand turn.
It there were no cars in the inside lane then your driver should not have been in the middle lane. Th motorcyclist was undoubtably trying to make a point, and failing by the sounds of it!
The poster made it quite clear that the inside lane wasn’t clear, but the outside overtaking lane was!
It’s simple make all Lanes the same as in America.
Not wishing to defend the motorcyclist whose actions were seem rather poor; why did your driver brake? If you had just been passed by a vehicle travelling at higher speed, alleging a need to brake defies logic. I think there is more to this than stated.
‘Undertaking’ has an easy fix – when you’ve overtaken, move over!
Where the M61 meets the M6 I was coming up the M6 indicating to pull over into the new lanes as they appear. I was doing 70 ish. Didn’t stop a car coming off the M61 passing on my inside at well over 100mph. He then weaved his way from lane to lane without slowing down. He was overtaking then pulling back in across two lanes to undertake before pulling out again. If I’d had a dash cam I would definitely have uploaded it.
The worst place for it is on the M60 where a lane comes off a junction to form a new lane to leave on the M66. You can be indicating to pull over into the new lane yet a stream of cars coming up the new lane will fly by ignoring your indicator, and that’s when you are travelling at 70mph.
Entirely true, and entirely irrelevant to this situation where they were *still overtaking*! Go back and read the post that is the subject of this conversation…
In America undertaking is legal, and the result is that their roads are much more pleasant to drive on than ours, as well as being safer.
Remember that the most dangerous time on a motorway is when you are changing lanes.
It is long overdue that our laws be changed.
Spot on Mike. While driving up the M1 recently in Derbyshire, on a section that had 4 lanes, a woman was sitting in the 3rd lane doing around 50mph.
Drivers like that need prosecuting as they are in effect blocking the road up.
I was on the M25 two weeks ago at midnight. I was doing 65 in a completely empty lane 1 and undertook a POLICE CAR in lane 2! (4 other cars ahead of it). I slowly pulled alongside them and moved ahead. When they realised, they accelerated and overtook me and sped off.
The highway code tells you not to pull back in if you are going to have to pull straight out again. If you maintain the correct distance from the car in front while waiting for fast-moving traffic coming up on your outside to pass so you can overtake yourself there are often idiots who will fly up behind you cut in and back out again to save a couple of seconds. I have even seen idiots flying up the hard shoulder to pass traffic. If you’ve never been undertaken in those circumstances either you are driving to close to the car in front or you don’t use motorways much.
Please advise the number of the Highway Code rule to which you are referring.
This morning there was a tractor on a dual carriageway on my way to work. People were pulling into the outside lane whilst they were doing approximately the same speed, so they merged in plenty of time.
All except the Audi behind me, that pulled in, shot past 5 or six cars on the inside, then swerved out in front of a car just before it would have hit the tractor.
Undertaking while all the cars in the outside lane were in the correct position.
Not all cases are as black and white as some simpletons here believe
Yes, there are fools on the road who have no business behind the wheel of a vehicle … I’m just a bit saddened at how readily we all seem to be running headlong into the kind of society enjoyed in East Germany before the Berlin Wall finally came down; informing on neighbours and even close family etc. All those who are prepared to submit information should form a loose coalition – we could call it the Staatssicherheitsdienst, or Stasi for short.
The STASI didn’t usually send you a written warning or give you the chance to defend yourself in court!
Citizens self regulating of selfish mavericks is what societies do.
I believe Hitler youth use to do the same, spy and report, its a real sad world we now live in where there is absolutely NO privacy at all every where you go you are filmed by some one for some thing, and as for dash cams I am lost for words most nights driving home by the idiot with his/her dash cam running whilst under taking, driving over chevrons, speeding on particular mum passed me that close I could of touched her passenger window with ease dash cam lit up kids in the back whilst she was texting, I get the impression a lot of these idiots think they are safe because they “have a dash cam”…….. well what’s behind you? they may a cam as well
Report them, dash cam works both ways. The owner can be prosecuted on the evidence of THEIR own camera.
Totally agree, they think they’re right so they basically report themselves, if only!
What I’ve seen is overly dithering people with dashcams on occasion. Chances are the dashcam doesn’t provide rear facing footage showing a line of held up traffic or the repeated, unnecessary and inappropriate braking of the dashcam vehicle. That is not clear on dashcam footage nor is the rise of frustration in any other drivers so there are definitely negatives to dashcams but obviously this is not generally representative in the main, I think.
That’s not the fault of dashcams, just certain drivers that you have noticed. Same could be said of BMW or Audi drivers being nutters, or blue cars driving slowly.
If you had a dashcam of someone driving dangerously you could always report it yourself, especially if they kept braking all the time.
Notice how I was voted down for the previous comment.
That speaks volumes about the voter.
Funny thing is earlier this evening at commuting time, I saw exactly what I described before; an grey haired man holding up an Audi which made overtake intention obvious with strong acceleration from a roundabout in a 70mph limit. If he moved over, the Audi would have passed easily as there was over 100 metres of clear road. When the road returned to a 60mph limit, the self appointed road captain into the Corsa deliberately stayed in the right hand lane right to the chevrons even though there was no justification or other traffic.
Road range would be virtually impossible without such narrow minded, selfish fools who encourage it. He later proved his poor perception and poor driving with needless braking and then reinforced his lack of care for others by doing around 10mph over a later encountered 30mph.
EXACTLY what I stated earlier.
But yes, it is no fault of the dashcam.
I wonder if well paid lawyers invest in dashcam companies.
You are a tit
When one has no argument to forward, there is always personal abuse. Hope it made you feel better!
Oh I see the intelligent ones are here, only way to express themselves is a to use words like this. I am sure you are the inspiration of many and your parents are so chuffed at the height of your intellect.
I would image you are one of these morons who thinks its their right to do most anything they want no matter what impact it has on anyone else…. type of person everyone wonders why they are still breathing really.
You vill be shot at dawn!
I wonder how long you had to sit there before you could muster up enough brain matter to form the word tit? It’s probably quite a large word for you! I bet when you’re exposed to a loud sound the echoes reverberate around that empty chamber which your brain should have occupied For hours.
That’s a great idea
This scheme is to help police prosecute the idiots we see every day on the roads and help to stop deaths and injuries.If one of your family is injured by an idiot I bet you
If only, in London it’s about angry cyclists who view their video after getting home then deciding to complain! Zero reaction at the actual time of the incident, says it all really, no reaction so the problem is……..
Just another legion of do gooders. Perhaps they should concentrate on their own driving rather than trying to catch out others.
Would the two people who wrote the comments above reflect on how they would feel if they had lost a member of their family or a child to such an illegal driver?
Is the person who informs on your driving qualified to do so? Also, I thought that cctv evidence could not be used in court, unless cctv warning stickers had been in evidence, and I don’t see many of these stickers on cars. Also, you say illegal drivers. What may I ask, quantifies or qualifies me or you to decide what is illegal or not? What Ifa child runs out between two parked cars? If they get hit, is it the car drivers fault? What is illegal about someone simply driving back home, only to be confronted by a child running out into their path, but you can bet the person with the dash cam would soon be shouting “ look at me, I’m really clever, I’ve got it all on camera”, and we all know the innocent motorist would be crucified for something that wasn’t their fault ,even though they were driving within legal requirements.
The person does not need any qualification, they submit the footage and the people who are qualified make that decision.
CCTV stickers to make footage legal, who told you that, a schoolkid!
If a kid runs out and you hit them it’s not your fault unless you were breaking the law, the footage will convict you if guilty, clear you if innocent.
Your post is really ill thought out, read it and consider your comments for a moment…..
I’ve the stickers on my car, also it’s not the driver who decides if the footage is worthy of prosecution, it’s whoever views it and sends it to the CPS.
Obviously you have a bee in your bonnet JP.
U never got your hole last night didn’t u no 😩😩
Illegal driver? Who said they were illegal? Join the police force instead of posting s**t if you want to make a difference.
you think a cam will stop them! nothing else has, its all about the modern way of life now in particular I’ll do what I want, its my right!
It’s just like ‘murica
Having been almost wiped out twice in HEAD ON crashes, once by an idiot overtaking on a blind bind on double white lines and again by 2 cars overtaking a petrol tanker into my turn-right filter lane I’m all in favour of sending off camera footage to the NEXTBASE portal. Unfortunately the first 2 got away with it because my camera footage wasn’t good enough to capture the number plates. I’ve got a NEXTBASE dashcam now which captures the plates quite well at approaching relative speed. I’ve used it once as police evidence and I’ll use it again because these ‘ssholes should be off the road.
We all make misjudgements/ miscalculates when driving and most get away with it not causing an accident, I hope the people filming it use common sense in the their judgement before sending in the offence, its the middle lane hoggers, the brake, indicate merchants and no indications on roundabouts that need snitching on
I agree. There’s a big difference between making a mistake and driving dangerously, which is probably why only a low percentage of clips are followed up.
This is quite literally the same as the Chinese “Social credit system”… The state using people to SNITCH on other people… You lot are so conditioned to follow orders you are actually gleefully happy to possibly ruin another persons life… All you saying this is a good idea… WTF is wrong with you? You are part of the PROBLEM, never the SOLUTION.
A whinging snowflake who will scream murder when one of their own is killed or maimed by a mad driver. The idea that it will never happen to you is very unlikely in the twenty first century.
I for one would be happy to ‘ruin someone’s life’ as you call it by snitching on them if they were driving so dangerously as to show they were very likely to ruin someone else’s life in a collision. We have more than enough deaths and serious injuries on our roads without irresponsible people like you advocating that such drivers should be allowed to get on with it, and we should mind our own business. It IS our business. One can only wonder how well you drive.
pricks like you are part of the problem, wait till you loose someone close to you by one of these idiots. if you drive relatively safely you wont have a problem.
Recently a person who knocked down and killed an old lady on a zebra crossing near here was only convicted because another driver caught it on a dashcam which proved the driver’s claim that the old lady had stepped out in front of him was a lie. Would you have liked him to get away with it, particularly if it was your mother?
I can tell from your attitude and response that you are one of the bad drivers with no regard for anyone but yourself’ and that you’ completely underline the need for such reporting.
If a privacy Campaigner was the victim of a persons dangerous driving he would be the first person to complain
It’s just like the politically correct brigade always winging
I am fed up with them all
Lets go back to the 60’s when you could call a spade a spade
MMMmmmm a spade?
I though that was incorrect now, isn’t call a digging implement. didn’t the 60’s also have a thing called freedom of speech, which we still have now providing you use the right words in the right place and don’t upset a single person or animal.
Pity you can’t report cyclists. Oh, I forgot, they don’t have number plates do they.
On the M40 last night, during the usual heavy traffic, I had the idiot souped up hatchback driver who was weaving in and out of cars at very high speed, crossing from the near lane to the ouside lane between vehicles in a very dangerous way, including undertaking. Of course, this type will have an accident, but he will also kill or maim some innocent driver as well, and will usually get off lightly in the courts, as usual, if he’s not dead by then. Yes, I do have it on dashcam, but whether the police will accept it is another matter.
Ah, you’ve met my grandma then.
None of us are perfect drivers however there are some who drive so dangerously that dash cam should be used to get them of the road , I am talking of the idiots using our roads as race tracks who think they are in a “Fast & Furious” film. Weaving in and out of traffic at excessive speed , driving along dual carriage ways at a 100 plus etc etc and these are not all boy racers in hatchbacks it goes for all age groups and vehicle types.
A couple of weeks ago I was nearly clobbered by an HGV in a country lane traveling far to fast around a tight bend .He should not have even been there but who is going to stop them only dash-cam footage so just put up with it everyone
Foolish! for not anticipating danger on a narrow country lane on a tight bend! Foolish! For thinking lorries and other large vehicles shouldn’t be there, (or other dangers) and perhaps you should concider slowing down yourself so as to give yourself time to see these very large vehicles that most other people would see in plenty of time!
There’s a saying and it’s this, if you’ve got it a lorry brought it! That explained is your big freezer etc etc etc to people’s homes, and lots of homes are in country lane locations.
Hope this helps 🙂
The police can’t be everywhere and with more cuts than ever mean they got to prioritise their resources. It’s not big brother or spying. If you are not doing wrong then you have nothing to worry about. Only the drivers who think the rules of the road don’t apply to them have to worry. I have shopped a taxi driver for going through a red light. If you or someone you know was killed or injured by someone jumping lights/ speeding or being dangerous you would welcome dashcam footage of the incident.
The ratio of police to population is far better today tha than it was in 1960.
There Are speed limits and rules of the road, many of which are blatantly broken by some drivers as a matter of course. Those who assume the Highway Code does not apply to themselves deserve to be suitably punished and if the likelihood of being shopped’ by their fellow motorists is going to make them think twice, then so be it.
It is an excellent opportunity for the law breakers who think they can flought the law be caught and punished
Quite a few people are of the opinion that this scheme is all about people with dashcams actively seeking out bad driving and then pursuing them in order to capture video evidence. It’s not! The purpose of it is to report bad driving that your dashcam has recorded during your journey, that just happened to occur as you were driving along. There is no vigilantism involved. As to reporting them to the police, isn’t is better that (assuming the offence is considered serious enough) the culprit is apprehended and charged with the offence, which ‘might’ make them think twice the next time, rather than them getting away with it, and continuing their reckless behaviour, which, at some point may result in the death or injury of another person(s)?
Motorway driving has changed! Lane 3 appears to be favoured even when there’s nothing in lanes 1 and 2. At times, it travels slower than lane 2, but no one bothers to change lane. I was brought up to believe these were overtaking lanes. As for lane 1, it’s often pretty clear, travelling at the legal speed limit. Dashcams are another piece of technology that gets in the way of common sense.
Without dashcams, I would’ve been made unemployed many times over. People think that because you drive a signed vehicle you should give way to them trying to carve you up. They report you and make up stories. And where I have been unable to avoid the idiots, the stories they tell their insurer makes me look like I’ve never driven before.
Yet in EVERY instance, my cam footage showed my exemplary driving and their foolishness.
Each claim would’ve resulted in insurance going 50/50 because nobody ever stopped to be a witness. In fact, one guy made so much fuss at the roadside that he managed to persuade half a dozen people to be witnesses on his behalf – his whole claim (and theirs) was a complete lie and the camera showed this.
I have also had 6 occasions to stop and offer my footage. Cam footage is far more accurate than eyewitness accounts.
wonder how they would feel if I uploaded footage of a police car driver necking back a can of Coke while driving… no doubt the get out clause would be he had advance driver training…
It wouldn’t be submitted as evidence. The freemasons would see to that.
Don’t talk utter rubbish
If you submitted the evidence it would have been dealt with accordingly, even despite the ‘Masonic’ innuendo debate. All police cars have specific markings thereon to identify them as well as number plates.
Not excusing the driver as stated, where are these officers going to have their break when most police stations are closed and officers are having to go from job to job all shift with no break on 12 hour shift patterns to cope with the lack of current resources. the same goes for Ambulance crews!! who receive the abuse when trying to help someone who is ill and return to the vehicle to find a rude vulgar not on the windscreen. If these pepole would record it and submit it they would receive a reply to the comments.
No the police are harder on their own for misdemeaners
Why should motorists subsidize cyclists? This is a question that can now be extended to mobility scooter owners and electric scooters. I see more and more of them on the road – fecking nightmare! Get them off the highways! Cyclists are bad enough (not all), running through red lights one minute and riding on pavements, the next. Cycle lanes are paid for through taxes from motorist. If you use the road, pay for its upkeep!
Some cyclist are drivers, therefore already paying.
If cyclist are to pay, how much should they cough-up to get rid of all those holes or uneven surfaces which are a danger to them but either smooth sailing for a car or too near the curb to be generally used by cars? Perhaps everyone’s road tax would rise to give cyclist safe surfaces and to justify charging them. Who wins – road tax!
If you have two cars you have to pay two road taxes.
Chris – your naivety is almost endearing. Cycle lanes are paid for by everyone out of council taxes via county council budgets, they are nothing to do with motorists. There is no subsidising of cyclists, who, as non-polluters, have MORE right to be on the road than fuel-burning polluters. Try driving in Amsterdam or Copenhagen – then you’ll see who public enemy #1 is.
What you believe to be ‘road tax’ is merely your licence to drive a polluting vehicle. Which is why electric cars pay nothing. Do you shout at them for not paying ‘road tax’ and subsidising gas-guzzlers like you?
most cyclists pay rates and car tax get your biased and ignorant facts right were would you put them bet you have cut up cyclists for the fun of it
The UK has more CCTV cameras per capita than any other country in Europe; have they stopped knife crime, traffic offences and daylight street robberies? No, I didn’t think so.
Average speed cameras are a form of CCTV, and they certainly do work. Knife crime and robbery don’t happen with a big identification plate on their back. You may as well say they’ve not stopped stupid people posting comments for all the relevance your comment has.
Great idea! Hope it does get expanded across these islands. Far too much dangerous driving occurs – I see it on a daily basis on my 26 mile commute to and from work. What traffic police there are appear to be far more interested in sitting in speed camera vans filming motorists breaking nominal outdated speed limits on long straight, often empty, sections of road when they should be travelling along commuter routes and pulling over vehicles driving dangerously, not simply those touching 61mph in a 60mph zone. Unfortunately three of the biggest hazards on our roads are not, as yet as far as I know, illegal – lorries overtaking each other on dual carriageways and motorways simply to swap places and more often than not on uphill sections where they do not have the power to get past and cause holdups for miles; motorists toddling along the road at 40mph in their small hatchbacks totally oblivious to the long tailbacks behind them and who unfortunately no longer confine themselves to Sunday afternoon outings; and again on a slow hold up vein, the farmers and farm workers who think commuting to and from work by tractor during the morning and evening rush hours is a great idea (especially if they have previously been caught with red diesel in their BMWs and Mercedes and now use their untaxed, uninsured, no MOT tractors instead).
the majority of speed camera sites are in place due to the number of accidents within that location they are not set on a whim of some non-entity.
You’re living in cloud cuckoo land. Most councils will look at improving the road in areas of high accident rates, reducing speed limits, better signage, etc. The fact that a mobile speed camera is used just shows there is no need to address any failings.
Sandy Allen if you drove an HGV you would understand that speeding up and slowing down are very different from driving a car and even a 2 mph difference can be the difference between meeting your targets and being late. Often drivers have a delivery slot of only 20 minutes. If they miss it they can be queueing for hours. Don’t be so impatient!
I take it you haven’t been to Staffordshire Malcolm, with cameras every mile on some roads like the A5 and A34
I For one favour dash cams. Not only are they good for insurance purposes but also catching footage of the diabolical driving I see almost daily. I have one in my car and also a helmet cam when riding my bike. Any help we can give the police, all the better.
Go to Russia and join the KGB, because if we let ourselves report every Tom Dick or Harry for even minor infringements, that is precisely the type of society we will end up with.
You mean you would not report a crime you prat you deserve to be a victim
Reporting minor infringements doesn’t result in prosecutions. The police are quite picky, and may just send warning letters, if anything. Hardly KGB tactics.
A great step forward for road safety, maybe not as mostly the effect of being caught is long after the event but this has potential to make some of the idiots on our roads think twice before committing offences that at times risk other people’s lives. With insurance scams on the increase too this may be the only defence we have to prove what really happened.
I would have absolutely no qualms in submitting video evidence to stop idiot drivers from being idiots the next time.
SUNDAY MOTORCYCLISTS HAD BETTER WATCH OUT!
They go out early to avoid the idiotic car drivers who always clutter the roads on a Sunday and drive at reduced speeds. They like to get their ride in before attending Church.
any use of a dash camera requires the vehicle or location to be signed that there is a camera in use there, this may cause drivers to think about the manner in which they drive!! conversely certain road users consider these cameras to be force field protecting them, whereas in fact it could provide evidence of their own indiscretion in relation to the rules of the road in this country. ‘let him without sin cast the first stone’
So right you are, these cameras can work against the operator as much as anyone around them, so long as everyone follows the rules of the road, drives sensibly and within what road signs say wheres the problem.
Camera footage can be used from anywhere. Nowadays drivers need to know that stupidity can be punished no matter where you are, whether there are signs or not. Only speed cameras require signage.
If you cant do the time, dont commit the crime.
Only people driving dangerously need worry.
This is a Cyclist’s view.
Until I retired in September 2018 I was a cycle-commuter in Leicester whose daily route used part of the A6 Abbey Lane and St Margarets Way. None of the footways on that part of my route were designated for cyclists’ use so, to be legal, I had to ride on the carriageway. I was overtaken dangerously closely (I define that as the car’s nearside door mirror passing less than 6″ from my handlebar-end) at least weekly, cut up (drivers overtaking me just before a junction then immediately turning left) three-four times a week, actually hit by a passing car once with at least two other very near misses and regularly abused by motorists who, in their ignorance and impatience*, clearly believed that cyclists have no place on any carriageway. I didn’t have a helmet camera at the time so I couldn’t evidence my reports to the Police. I do now. I’m still a cyclist although not as frequently and not during peak hours. Nevertheless, those incidents continue.
*Leicester is Traffic Light City. Regardless of whether a driver barges past a cyclist or passes courteously and safely, the Third Law of Sod guarantees that he or she will be held at a red light within two junctions.
Its not new in the sixties and seventies motorists were just as ignorant and threatening
I’ve successfully submitted footage of a driver overtaking me on a blind bend on a country lane, nearly taking out an oncoming cyclist. Idiots that don’t think of cyclists will no doubt act similarly to pedestrians and other road users.
If you’e driving reasonably safely, there should be no worries for anyone.
Fully support this approach, particularly if an additional benefit is that some of the idiot drivers on the road start to think twice about their appalling driving habits.
Well, some drivers deliberately drive so slowly, that one does not know if they have broken down or just being stupid. You overtake them, next munute you know, you have been filmed. And the police come knocking on your door. Its just not a fair system in some circumstances.
The problem is that these people who do the reporting think they are God’s gift to driving. What they don’t understand is that just because they think they are in the right when they are doing 50mph on a 60mph road, everyone who overtakes them is speeding and driving dangerously. When was the last time you saw a slow moving vehicle make room for regular traffic to pass? Tractors, lorries, granddad out on Sunday? They all own the road and courtesy has long gone out of the window. Even on a motorway you have the mentality that says I’m driving at 70 so I sit in lane 3 because no one should overtake me. Dash cams used in this way will just lead to road wars. Would the middle lane hogger scream “injustice” if a faster car sent a dash cam of them sitting in the middle lane when the inside was clear? Or maybe a lorry with 20 cars queued behind it?
Hardly. Overtaking, unless in a dangerous place won’t result in a prosecution. Even cameras with GPS speed indications can’t be used to verify the speed to result in a conviction.
A lot of these comments on hyping up the Big Brother aspect seem rather exaggerated or paranoid. Possibly drivers that know they aren’t very good are getting worried.
Well I work in a secure area with lots of surveillance, so is that not the same as snooping on me with a dash cam as a so called vigilante would? what’s the difference, we are under big brother whether we like it or not, our government nanny state snoops on us as well, so I think privacy in the UK is a farce and does not exist in reality! I see no problem though with utilizing dash cam footage if it brings justice, I certainly welcome it if it brings a dangerous driver to court, I’ve used my dash cam for this purpose myself.
I think this breeds a culture of spying and I am not at all comfortable with it. I also suspect most, if not all drivers, have done something wrong or just plain silly at some time. We are under surveillance from everywhere. 1984 is arriving, if a little late. Use of these cameras should limited to insurance evidence and for incidents which are already under investigation by the official police and not by S.A.M.s (self appointed policemen).
The decision to prosecute is down to the police after reviewing it. If it’s not clearly dangerous at most they will get a warning letter.
Yes. I would submit footage.
Are people going to send in video footage of their own bad driving to the database or use of correct lanes on A roads or motorways for example
Found the system doesn’t work in South Yorkshire. Used the system to submit an undertake by an idiot. We were travelling on A1 pulling caravan through South Yorkshire. Just overtook a slow HGV and as my wife went to pull back to near side lane, an idiot overtook HGV then undertook is causing my wife to swerve back to outside lane which is a scary thing when the caravan swerved all over as well.
Submitted dash am and informed someone from SYP would contact us. After two weeks no contact so contacted SYP who had no record of it as they’re not in the scheme. Phoned Nextbase who stated they don’t have anything to do with the system as it’s all done through a third party who handles everything. No-one could find where my footage had gone even though the could see I’d submitted it. Waste of time on this occasion and annoying. If SYP are not in the scheme it should not allow anyone to waste their time
The insurance companies should be able to decline cover for bad aggressive drivers on the strength of video footage
Saddest people on the planet that can find the time to upload dashcam footage.
The saddest people are those who condone crime and do nothing about it you certainly are a selfish person
On some modern cars with built in wifi, it’s as simple as typing in the url and the car’s systems will upload it…
With that attitude, I suspect you have little respect for other people. Probably shows with your driving style.
I have a dashcam which I leave in place all the time however when I take my car for MOT I have to remove it otherwise it’s a fail. If footage is deemed legal surely the hardware is also legal. Time for VOSA to review?
Without wishing to be pedantic, the MOT scheme is administered by DVSA these days but yes, I agree their rules and need to constantly change things, then back again and repeat again does show there are those making the rules who really don’t have th necessary calibre. However, in opposition to that, I have noticed too many who do have poorly placed dashcams and SatNavs which often have far too great screen brightness at night. No wonder many drive too slowly as the safety device must reduce vision and hence safety. That must make VOSA’s policy quite complicated and difficult which explains the blanket fail.
A friend of mine had her car written off by a drunk driver while parked outside her house, our police were not interested, so my grandson did a bit of detective work, found out who he was and all his details and the guy admitted responsibility, gave the details to the police, they failed to bring him to court within the six month’s timescale, since then this guy has posted a clip of himself on Facebook, standing up in the driver’s seat of a convertible car whilst driving down a main road ?? Again the police are not taking action, so is it worth bothering with sending in dash cam footage I ask myself, I have a dash cam and I don’t think I shall be wasting my time.
Several years ago I used to drive a series 3 lightweight Land Rover a vehicle that is much slower than today’s cars, or even the latest cars back then. I never used to get cut up by boy racers, inconsiderate driving or roundabout bully’s etc. Therefore a dashcam was unessential I think the reason for this was a sign on the tailgate stating ( if you can read this my crumple zone is the first six feet of YOUR car ) a little under 2 metres in today’s money.
Such a shame these vehicles are now politically incorrect.
Maybe it is people’s lack of reading ability and practice of referring back to the highway code if you are not quite sure about something.
The odd thing is the British highway code was the first in the world and even today the signs are the benchmark for most countries today, so as not to confuse people there’s even pictures of the signs, so there can be little excuse for not knowing what they mean whatever your level of literacy or Nationality.
Other reasons could be complacency in having your eyes checked on a regular basis, especially as you get older, the realisation that the driving licence you won in a lucky dip on Skegness seafront is not actually legal.
As for dashcams I suspect that all vehicles will be required to have them fitted by law, a good starting point would be for insurance companies to offer a real and genuine discounts for all vehicles fitted with them, I believe this option should be mandatory for all newly qualified drivers provided this is accompanied by speed limiting within reason and most importantly lower insurance premiums. This should be acceptable by most motorists who want to encourage safer driving amongst the younger generation.
As for reporting to the police first you need to determine if it is just bad driving, the driver may be an actual human being having a bad day that could also be anyone catching you having a bad day on dashcam.
Next you need to determine if the offending driver is having a road rage attack, drink or drug driving and deliberate dangerous driving, in such cases I for one would contact the police as this is the kind of driving that KILLS and I for one would not help anyone else hoping to get away with this behavior.
No I am not a perfect driver but I hope that anyone having a bad day or trouble concentrating on their driving will take just one tip from me : give the keys to your partner and let them do the driving or take a long break have a hot drink and a nap if needed, only carry on after you are refreshed. It is better to get home late than get to the mortuary early.
I wonder how many prosecuted were Audi’s ?
I Will definitely be using this now I’ve discovered it, I’m sick and tired of speeding’ tailgating’ undertaking’ phoning’ make up adjusting’ idiots on the road.
King is an idiot; more cops on the roads would do little to catch mad motorists who save their misdemeanours until there is no cop to be seen. I have no dashcam yet but you have helped me to decide which brand I should buy. One of the worst dagerous manoeuvres I have witnessed involved an unmarked police car: I would have been delighted to report that.
No one has mentioned that a dash cam can reduce road rage. Instead of being tempted to do something silly because someone cut you up, you can now show footage to the Police with the knowledge that if the event was as dangerous as you thought the other driver could face prosecution.
So I agree it’s acceptable to share the video with the Police. Drive according to the rules and you have nothing to fear.
PS: What’s with the intense debate about undertaking? Off topic or what 🤷♂️
Having had a recent head on crash, looney overtaking a lorry on a blind bend, I stopped they didn’t my Nextbase saved a lot of issues especially as driver got the passenger to originally take the blame! Only when I asked the police when were they going to dial to the driver they asked for proof, easy peesy!
I have submitted footage but only if the other driver caused me to alter my course of direction, did I have to slam on my brakes, yep I did because I didn’t want to watch the idiot ride the the barrier! Said idiot became totally abusive at the first opportunity when stopped at a red light. I’ve no idea what happened to them but I don’t appreciate someone trying to kill me or themselves.
I don’t understand this at all. You had a head on collision where you had to stop yet the other vehicle was able to drive on in the opposite direction to the way you were travelling yet you were side by side at a red light further into your journey.
I’ve had a dashcam for a few years, and submitted a clip for the first time the other day – the driver of a van using the hard shoulder to undertake rather than wait a few seconds to use the outside lane. He then cut straight out into lane two.
Drivers like that need taking off our already busy roads, it’s no different to reporting any other crime.
I see lots of stupid behaviour when I’m driving, but this was the first incident where I felt the police needed to know about such a dangerous driver.
I fully support using dashcam footage as evidence in trial. Can only be good news for reckless motorists who put others at risk. I wonder when they will begin using the evidence to prosecute motorists who are incapable of moving from the middle lane of a motorway?
I have dashcam footage of a cyclist running a red light and then cutting across traffic onto a pavement etc -pointless submitting it as they are above the law and except from prosecution!
In my opinion it breeds mistrust and suspicion.But as the saying goes “what goes around comes around” andany driver can make a mistake at anytime and the dashcams user may very well find their on the receiving end of the actions they have taken against another driver,and there’s also the issue of sell reporting by the dashcams driver of uploading their own mistakes to the police database.
Middle/outside lane hoggers really get my goat on motorways. No need to sit in the middle/outside lane when the lane inside you is obviously bloody clear… This law should be enforced much more harshly..
Yes, if a crime is committed resulting in damage and/or injury. If no harm is done, I see this as an intrusion. There should be a facility for the defendant to respond. In general, why are convicted criminals’ names often protected by some sort of ‘human rights’ legislation? Anyone should be held to account for their actions.
Some good, some bad. Having received a notice for only giving a cyclist only 2.25 metres of space (driving at about 20mph, it is easy to see how some footage submitted can be vexatious.
Do you lie and accept the course or do you insist that 2.25 metres at that speed is safe and risk a bigger fine if the magistrate is having an off day?