Upload Dash Cam Footage to The Police ??

[Westy36]

I read this news article recently:

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/103949/dash-cam-portal-saves-170000-hours-police-time-two-years

What are your thoughts? Would you upload footage of a reckless driver? Have you done so already?

[RichardA]

Slightly off topic, I would kindly ask members not to post dashcam footage if it is to be used as part of prosecution by the police or in an insurance claim. Some police forces actually ask you not to make such footage public on social media when reporting incidents.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

[Kremmen]

I have, once.

The portal I used was a joint  Police/Nextbase project. Not all Police areas subscribe but my submission to Sussex was OK.

[Jocko]

Yes, Any video on social media can jeopardise a successful prosecution.
Police Scotland does not have a portal for uploading dashcam footage.

[John Ratsey]

If I knew that the police were interested in following up bad and dangerous driving then I would fit cameras front and back on my bicycle as I've encountered innumerable incidents of bad overtaking. Last Sunday a car overtaking me forced an oncoming car to stop. The police are unlikely to be motivated given the leniency often provided by the judicial system to repeat offenders eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39053658 .

[sparky Paul]

Going off topic a bit, but related to the prosecutions bit, I heard an interesting tale on a LBC phone in the other day from a chap who was prosecuted for not providing a specimen of breath... as a passenger in a car.

He accepted a lift from a friend, and said friend was subsequently pulled over. Instead of keeping his mouth shut, he (the passenger) admitted that he got a bit lippy protesting his friend's innocence, and the Police then asked him for a sample of breath.

Being the passenger, he refused, and was successfully prosecuted for refusal. He said that the magistrate said that it was a highly unusual case, but apparently the Police can stop you anywhere and demand a breath test - including if you are walking down the street - refusal to provide a specimen is the specific offence, and the sentence is the same, driving ban and/or points etc..

He said that he learned to keep shtum in future.

[Kremmen]

A driving ban for being a passenger !!!

[Jocko]

A driving ban for refusing a breath test. What would they have done if he didn't have a license?

[sparky Paul]

A driving ban for refusing a breath test. What would they have done if he didn't have a license?

He would have had to serve it as soon as he applied for one, same as youngsters who commit offences before they get a license.

Obviously, they would find some other way to punish you, fine or something.

[Westy36]

  Breatherlysed as a passenger? Unless you were supervising a learner, I didn't know they could do that. Learn something new everyday.

The reason I started this topic is I find the subject a bit of a moral maze. I reported a driver earlier this year using my dashcam footage clearly showing their very dangerous driving. (I wont quote and details or post the footage for obvious reasons). Very reckless driving in an urban area that puts people at risk, and that driver being prosecuted using evidence supplied by Joe public has to be a good thing? I got confirmation of intention to prosecute in my case, but no follow up on the result.

However, like all things, in the balance I can see that there are rammifications. If the driver were to receive 6 points and a large fine, that could have a massive impact in their lives. Possible employment implications, and if a new driver, even a ban. I thought for some time about reporting the driver, but felt I had no choice but to do the 'right' thing. Judging by the statistics in the linked article I'm not alone in doing so either.

In my opinion, we do not want a society that resembles the old GDR with 1/10 being a state informer, but with the almost total lack of policing on the roads and prolific use of dash cams, are we becoming so without realising?

[sparky Paul]

Breatherlysed as a passenger? Unless you were supervising a learner, I didn't know they could do that. Learn something new everyday.

You're not on your own, it was a surprise to me too. If he had given a breath sample as requested and had tested positive, he would have been in the clear, as he was a passenger. It seems quite perverse.

However, like all things, in the balance I can see that there are rammifications. If the driver were to receive 6 points and a large fine, that could have a massive impact in their lives. Possible employment implications, and if a new driver, even a ban. I thought for some time about reporting the driver, but felt I had no choice but to do the 'right' thing. Judging by the statistics in the linked article I'm not alone in doing so either.

You said that the driver was driving recklessly. FWIW, if you thought that the driver was driving in such a way that may endanger other road users, I think you did the right thing.

I don't think we are talking here about a driver who has made a mistake or error, but someone has chosen to drive in a reckless manner. Surely every driver understands the potential ramifications of that choice - I would sooner see someone prosecuted than an innocent party injured, or worse.

[John Ratsey]

In my opinion, we do not want a society that resembles the old GDR with 1/10 being a state informer, but with the almost total lack of policing on the roads and prolific use of dash cams, are we becoming so without realising?

Perhaps some of the reckless drivers don't realise it and just need to be educated (having more TV programmes with examples of bad driving might have a beneficial effect) but many are just taking a chance, particularly with speeding and don't realise that they could be endangering others. When I'm at home I appreciate the DPD drivers turning up within the notified time slot but when I'm out on my bike I notice that they frequently are taking a chance by overtaking me in places where, if I was driving, I would hold back. They probably feel pressured to keep up with the schedule plus, as applies for all the delivery folk, the sooner the empty the van then the sooner they can go home. Should advanced driving tests be required for all those who drive for a living?

[Jocko]

I had two spells as a white van man, and I made it plain to both employers that I would not take chances or break the law to meet an artificial schedule.
When I first started driving buses that was when I found the greatest pressure trying to keep up to, or worse, catch up with, the posted timetable. The public are a shower of (expletive deleted). When you turn up 5 minutes late, due to large passenger numbers, delays in the traffic, sometimes even the previous driver handing over late, they girn and greet. They are always in a hurry that day. If I am in a hurry for something important, I get the earlier bus!

[MicktheMonster]

I think the police can only require a breath test from a passenger if they believe the passenger has been in control of a vehicle whilst
a) over the prescribed alcohol limit
b) committed a 'moving' traffic violation
c) been involved in a road traffic collision
or as already stated, whilst supervising a learner driver, or where there is reasonable doubt which of the car's occupants had been driving, they can all get done for it.
This is for England & Wales, Scotland & NI have their own laws & rules.
If someone without a licence is banned or gets points the DVLA create a virtual licence & issue a driver number which the endorsements are recorded on, if they ever apply for a licence their endorsements will be already be on it. Its the same for foreign drivers.

[sparky Paul]

I think the police can only require a breath test from a passenger if they believe the passenger has been in control of a vehicle whilst
a) over the prescribed alcohol limit

I guess that really leaves it wide open. A police officer could say that they believed that you had been driving, as a passenger, or even if you were walking down a footpath.

In the case I mentioned, there didn't appear to be any dispute over who was driving, the police officer was not interested in the passengers until the guy started getting uppity. I guess that might be enough to arouse the officer's suspicion, but as soon as he refused the test, he was done for.

His prosecution was due to his refusal to provide a specimen, not because the police believed he was driving.