Dash Cam Question

[Ninovan]

I was having a "discussion" today over lunch about dash cams and the person I was talking to swore blind that you have to have a visible notice displaying the fact that you have CCTV in use in order for any footage to be accepted by the courts as evidence. I have never heard of this before. Was he right? Thanks.

Chris

 

[Old Soldier]

It would not surprise me these days but not heard of it myself....yet!!

 

[SMB]

Interesting....I don't know but would like to

 

[pappajohn]

How many vehicles have you seen displaying a warning sign.
How would the courts know whether a sign was displayed or not ?

I say the person is wrong....and right technically.
he probably means for personal data protection purposes.

 

[ojibway]

Sounds like a load of rubbish but it wouldn't be surprise me!
We don't want to infringe anybody's rights even if they take a sledge hammer to your vehicle or falsely deny responsibility in an accident.
I have one in the MH and in our car or falsely

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SMB]

Just had a look on Wikipedia, illegal to use them in Austria, inadmissible in court in Germany

 

[SMB]

This might help:

http://news.mi-witness.co.uk/witness-dash-cams-the-law/

 

[tonyidle]

This might help:

http://news.mi-witness.co.uk/witness-dash-cams-the-law/

That makes perfect sense to me.

 

[DanielFord]

I think your friend is getting confused by a clause in the Data Protection Act, which requires businesses to clearly display warnings if cctv is being used and the video is being stored.

There are no such restrictions for filming in a public place, you may record whatever you like and you may store the film in whatever medium you like. This would cover a dashcam, since you will be on the public highway.

 

[GJH]

Ask your friend to point you to the specific clause of the legislation in question. It is certainly not a contravention of the DPA (speaking as an ex DP officer).

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Allanm]

This might help:

http://news.mi-witness.co.uk/witness-dash-cams-the-law/

"A dashcam video that indicates you were at fault certainly could be used by the other party against you. If you delete the video an adverse inference could be drawn from that act."
That bit sounds like rubbish to me..........how is anyone ever going to prove what was on the dash cam unless the other party or a witness had already seen it.
Sounds like it was written by someone with little experience of real life.
First things I would do in a crash that I caused would be to eat the sd card from the camera and rip off the "How am I driving" sticker

Allan

 

[pappajohn]

"A dashcam video that indicates you were at fault certainly could be used by the other party against you. If you delete the video an adverse inference could be drawn from that act."
That bit sounds like rubbish to me..........how is anyone ever going to prove what was on the dash cam unless the other party or a witness had already seen it.
Sounds like it was written by someone with little experience of real life.
First things I would do in a crash that I caused would be to eat the sd card from the camera and rip off the "How am I driving" sticker

Allan

Police forensics can recover data from an erased computer hard drive.

 

[Reallyretired]

I have a cctv warning in my Disco because the camera in it also films the interior. I have this because on 4x4 response work I sometimes will carry passengers who are strangers to me and I don't want any untrue accusations of misdoing.

My other vehicles have cameras that just work forwards and they have no signs.

 

[bernardfeay]

I understand our court system works on precedents. That means the law and or judgements move with the wisdom of our judges. If a judge makes a decision he gives his reasoning and that is open to conjecture by higher authorities. If his view prevails then it is quoted in future cases. So, if the judge considers that the evidence in front of him is admissible then he takes it into account. If, on the other hand, he feels that the other party has been disadvantaged by this evidence then he does not allow it.

 

[Bertie Bassett]

"A dashcam video that indicates you were at fault certainly could be used by the other party against you. If you delete the video an adverse inference could be drawn from that act."
That bit sounds like rubbish to me..........how is anyone ever going to prove what was on the dash cam unless the other party or a witness had already seen it.
Sounds like it was written by someone with little experience of real life.
First things I would do in a crash that I caused would be to eat the sd card from the camera and rip off the "How am I driving" sticker
Allan

What? Like a member of the legal profession you mean ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... (Chris, there are obvious exceptions old chum)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[robnchris]

There was a cyclist on the radio a couple of weeks ago that had 3 cameras on his person/bike, he not only filmed motorists jumping lights, using a mobile phone whilst driving or driving too close to him but also had 70 odd convictions attributed to his films being passed on to the police.
He didn`t have any such notices attached, so I`m going for you don`t have to display any such notice.

 

[tonyidle]

"A dashcam video that indicates you were at fault certainly could be used by the other party against you. If you delete the video an adverse inference could be drawn from that act."
That bit sounds like rubbish to me..........how is anyone ever going to prove what was on the dash cam unless the other party or a witness had already seen it.
Sounds like it was written by someone with little experience of real life.
First things I would do in a crash that I caused would be to eat the sd card from the camera and rip off the "How am I driving" sticker

Allan

Why? If I expect an honest account of an accident by anyone else involved the least I'd do is give one myself and include any evidence I had. Being honest does in general work in your favour even if the fault is yours.

 

[tonyidle]

There was a cyclist on the radio a couple of weeks ago that had 3 cameras on his person/bike, he not only filmed motorists jumping lights, using a mobile phone whilst driving or driving too close to him but also had 70 odd convictions attributed to his films being passed on to the police.
He didn`t have any such notices attached, so I`m going for you don`t have to display any such notice.

Quite. It is no different to using a video or still camera to take videos or photos. As long as you're in a public place there's no issue.

 

[GJH]

I have a cctv warning in my Disco because the camera in it also films the interior. I have this because on 4x4 response work I sometimes will carry passengers who are strangers to me and I don't want any untrue accusations of misdoing.

My other vehicles have cameras that just work forwards and they have no signs.

That is a different situation as far as the DPA is concerned. In a work situation the data controller is the business owner and any images recorded are subject to the business's registration criteria. Where we are recording images for our own use the S36 exemption (Domestic purposes) comes into play.

 

[DanielFord]

Ask your friend to point you to the specific clause of the legislation in question. It is certainly not a contravention of the DPA (speaking as an ex DP officer).

Quite, that is what I was trying to say, but in much more eloquent terms.
I doubt that the friend will be able to quote any legislation, in my experience, the DP act is the most often quoted and least understood pieces of legislation we have in this country (I'm sure you experienced that in you role)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

Quite, that is what I was trying to say, but in much more eloquent terms.
I doubt that the friend will be able to quote any legislation, in my experience, the DP act is the most often quoted and least understood pieces of legislation we have in this country (I'm sure you experienced that in you role)

Yes, I experienced that
Not unique though as I was also responsible for FoIA, RIPA, HRA &c, all misunderstood