Highway Code changes: video submissions made to police rise as cyclists urged to report law-breaking drivers

It'd be better if the onus was on drivers to run dashcams and submit evidence. Car dashcams are cheaper as they don't need a big internal battery, they don't need to be waterproof and weight is much less of an issue.

I do wonder how many drivers submit dashcam footage and what level of driving they submit them for. Forgetting actual collisions, there are several Youtube channels who release weekly videos filled with many examples of bad driving (both from Cammer and subject) and not one indicates whether it was submitted. 

However WMP sent me an email on Wednesday asking me for a resubmission over a mistake on my original form and it was above 1850 submissions this year. I can't believe that is all from cyclists. (although 15 of those would be mine). 

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

I do wonder how many drivers submit dashcam footage and what level of driving they submit them for. Forgetting actual collisions, there are several Youtube channels who release weekly videos filled with many examples of bad driving (both from Cammer and subject) and not one indicates whether it was submitted. 

The thing with the dash cam videos, which despite being so badly telegraphed that you can for the vast majority tell what's going to happen a long time before it happens, it staggers me how many drivers submit footage of their own bad driving as if they are looking for absolution from their peers.

Whenever those videos include a roundabout you can guarantee that it will either be some tool coming thundering onto the roundabout too fast, or being in the right hand lane and suddenly cutting across multiple lanes of traffic to get to an exit, or meandering round the outside lane in the roundabout to go to an exit about 3 or 4 further round.

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

I do wonder how many drivers submit dashcam footage and what level of driving they submit them for.

There was a story about this not so long ago. I think the upshot of it was that the police agreed that an offence was committed more often on the videos submitted by cyclists than videos by motorists.

Driver hits cyclist. Video Evidence is required in court case. Do you (victiim) rely on driver to present evidence to support driver's conviction and your personal injury claim.
Tricky.

Fignon's ghost wrote:

Driver hits cyclist. Video Evidence is required in court case. Do you (victiim) rely on driver to present evidence to support driver's conviction and your personal injury claim. Tricky.

This actually happened to me. Police motorcyclist (in private car) knocked me off my motorbike and admitted full liability to the Police (who were called by him) and his insurance. Got a big payout and a nice letter from the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police explaining why he was not being prosecuted. Of course this was 1999 so pre action cam.

Lol. Gtf. Anyone that uses a camera, fair play, you do you.
But I'd rather people learnt how to drive and dangerous drivers kept off the roads then rely on the superpower of a camera keeping me safe.

People learn how to drive, but then they are never tested again and fall into bad habits etc. So yes, tested again every 5 or 10 years would be one thing. I would even state the first retest should be within the first 2 years for newly passed driver as I know that was when I was at my worst. 

However the dangerous drivers need to be caught first and preferably not after they have KSI'd someone so if Dash and Bike cams can help with that, I'm all for them.But as I wouldn't push helmet use on anyone else (or tell people they shouldn't wear them), I also wouldn't be stating "every cyclist needs a camera front and back". 

Retests I'm all for, at the drivers expense. As a reachtruck driver I get tested every year,( more often then I legally need to be retested), with a health test every 5years. So chuck that in aswell, again at the motorists expense.

Maybe that would help weed out some of the dangerous drivers before they KSI. Unless they use the old, "but I'll lose my job" argument, so let's shut that door aswell.
And we we have that 'Road Safety Expert?' Loophole lawyer twat. Shut him up aswell, stop him setting precedents.

I'd have to agree with hawkinspeter , cars should be required to be use cameras. Possibly linked to a blackbox, so in the event of me being found laid crumpled at the side of the road the authorities can find out who was nearly by at X time and check footage

I don't see why it wouldn't be at the drivers expense being as original lessons and test would have been. However as others have pointed out in the past, it would rely on the government to up the amount of examiners to cope with the demand. 

Many modern cars already have a camera built in just behind the rear view mirror that is used to control safety features such as intelligent cruise control.  Wouldn't cost the manufacturers much more to set up a record function and use it as a dash cam you would have thought.  Even better if it were on a loop and not accessible by the driver so they couldn't wipe any impact recorded.

A Citroën 2 cv dolly wing mirror breaks your right arm in a close pass and continues its journey.
Do you.
A. Tie on a tree branch splint and carry on as normal.
B. Chuck your bike.
C. Regret that camera purchase.

door mirror.

Fignon's ghost wrote:

A Citroën 2 cv dolly wing mirror breaks your right arm in a close pass and continues its journey. Do you. A. Carry on as normal. B. Chuck your bike. C. Regret that camera purchase.

i just hope it's never:

D. Facepalm with my one not broken arm for not charging my cameras last night.

Oh, and you forgot:

E. Wonder why the 2cv driver unscrewed their door mirror and then attached it to the wing? (sorry, couldn't resist trolling you even though I agree with your constant 'cajoling' to run cameras on the road)

tigersnapper wrote:

Many modern cars already have a camera built in just behind the rear view mirror that is used to control safety features such as intelligent cruise control.  Wouldn't cost the manufacturers much more to set up a record function and use it as a dash cam you would have thought.  Even better if it were on a loop and not accessible by the driver so they couldn't wipe any impact recorded.

Exactly. All it would need is a tamper proof blackbox storing gps and video data. And make fiddling with the box an offence or something.

Hopefully. That's 10 years from now.
I'm talking about today.

Jimwill wrote:

tigersnapper wrote:

Many modern cars already have a camera built in just behind the rear view mirror that is used to control safety features such as intelligent cruise control.  Wouldn't cost the manufacturers much more to set up a record function and use it as a dash cam you would have thought.  Even better if it were on a loop and not accessible by the driver so they couldn't wipe any impact recorded.

Exactly. All it would need is a tamper proof blackbox storing gps and video data. And make fiddling with the box an offence or something.

It is called an event data recorder and is pretty much standard on new cars (I think it might even be required) - however I'm not sure how long it stores the data for before being overwritten. My car uploads (at least some of) the data, so I can go online and see how my car was driven on a particular journey, get fuel consumption and average speed - it's a bit like Strava for cars, but with an emphasis on fuel economy rather than KOMs

I have a mate who is a product director at JLR (they do have a lot of directors, so not that senior!) who asked the same question and got fobbed off with worries about the legality of recording without the owner's consent, which I would have thought was resolved by putting an option on a menu, or leaving the SD card slot empty!

You get smashed into touch by a motorist.
Do you.
A. Regret sorting a camera
B. Throw your bike in the bin.
C. Take an ice bath and carry on as normal.

Like I say. You do you.
Myself, I can't be arsed to buy and fit cameras to record the occasional close pass or mgif, then obsess over getting clips and sending them through whatever channels, when I can just give a handsignal showing my feelings then move on. Each to their own.
Besides cycling can be an off putting thing to try get into, all the stuff people are told they need to buy/wear. Shit, my local cycling club people won't even let me add them on Strava incase I steal their bikes.. their loss. Why add another obstacle?

I get it. You're a maverick. You don't want or need to work for "the man". You'll do it your way. Respect. Stay safe.

Fignon's ghost wrote:

If we cannot hold motorists to account for the terrible consequences their illegal driving has then we may as well stay on our paddleboards.

Admittedly, I've never used a paddleboard, but I reckon I'd probably be at more risk trying to take one of those down the road than I would cycling.

Maybe you should try that in Ayr - seems safe enough to row:

https://road.cc/content/news/206693-man-protests-bike-laneby-rowing-it

I dont agree it's my responsibility at all, I didnt sign up to be an extension of the police force on the roads as a cyclist, I just want to ride my bike in peace & quiet and be left alone.

I dont need the extra stress & hassle it creates for me, more so as the local force appear to have down prioritised dealing with cycling camera footage submissions so it all feels a total waste of time anyway, the latest stats for Q1 across Suffolk/Norfolk, 448 submissions resulted in 80 NIPs, and 85 warning letters.

It's barely making the roads safer at all

Awavey wrote:

I dont agree it's my responsibility at all, I didnt sign up to be an extension of the police force on the roads as a cyclist, I just want to ride my bike in peace & quiet and be left alone.

I agree its by no means a responsibility - its a choice & hectoring people to do so like the OP - is bang out of order imo.

Besides its a perception/expectation thing.  Not everyone has to run camera's for those caught by them to become more cautious which is the actual result we want.

I prefer to call it cajole. Your wellbeing is important.

Years in the future I see this footage being incorporated into an educational stream* in an attempt to counter rising aggression on the hyperloops* called "The (ICE) Taxis** - a lesson from history".

Thank you (and other camera users) in advance for your gallant documentation of these crimes.  I may even join you some day.  Just now I'm more about the top tiers of health and safety but indeed although better it does take longer.

* adjust as appropriate for future tech.

** Or more broadly "The Internal Combustion Engined Vehicle Drivers"

J Walter Weatherman would disagree.