- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
GoPro Hero HDMet Police say they want cyclists to wear cameras and report traffic offences
The Metropolitan Police has encouraged cyclists to wear cameras and submit footage of traffic offences. Detective Superintendent Andy Cox, who is responsible for road safety, said the growing prevalence of helmet cams could serve as a deterrent.
Last week film director Guy Ritchie lost his driving licence after being filmed texting at the wheel by cyclist Mike van Erp (Cycling Mikey).
A number of media outlets took an interesting tack with their coverage. Van Erp was branded a “lycra-clad vigilante” by the Mail, while the Mirror decided to focus on why he had “snitched”.
Auto Evolution headlined its story: “Vigilante cyclist rats texting drivers out to the police, keeps roads safe.”
This tone was predictably echoed on social media, where van Erp faced a veritable deluge of opprobrium for having the temerity to report a law-breaker to the police. (It’s worth pointing out that Ritchie himself immediately pleaded guilty to the charge.)
Tweeting in response to the Daily Mail story, Cox said: “The story here should be one of a driver penalised for using a phone whilst driving which greatly increases the chance of a fatal crash and the devastation that follows. Cycling Mikey should be praised for vast public service and considerable help and support to Road Safety.”
Speaking to the London Evening Standard, he went further.
“There’s a really significant surge in public reports of traffic offences via our portal at the Met,” he said.
“This is a game-changing moment for road safety. I encourage cyclists to wear a camera, we encourage it being referred to us and we will take action when we can. In terms of head cam and dashcam, in 2017 it was about 4,000 referrals, in 2018 it was about 5,000 but in 2019 it was 9,000 and this month alone we’ve had comfortably over 3,000.
“We know that word is out there that we’re getting far more referrals and I think that’s going to continue. We enforce about two thirds, so what you are getting is that deterrent effect. The police can’t be everywhere all of the time, but the public can. So drivers will be mindful.”
Top tips on submitting good quality camera evidence to police
Expanding on this, Cox said: “There is evidence that when people are more aware of offences on headcam then they are more safety conscious around cyclists.
“In the past, the dangerous driver in London looked for ‘are the police there, is there a speed camera?’ and if not drove a certain way.
“But now it’s dramatically changed — we’re up about eightfold on our referrals from 2017 — and if you are now a dangerous driver you have to be mindful of the person driving next to you.
“More people died on our roads nationally than from terrorism and homicide last year, and every year, so you recognise that there’s a real need for safer roads.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- ktache 2 sec ago
Now Emily Chappele really liked the Lezyne , I have the HV version, good, but I find the handle uncomfortable in use. I've often wondered about the...
- biking59boomer 6 min 51 sec ago
What about this one!?
- Muddy Ford 8 min 14 sec ago
Charlie Alliston got 18mths and is the reference case (because there are so few cases) for all campaigns by anti-cyclists that 'cyclists are not...
- RoubaixCube 55 min 31 sec ago
I do see cubes being reviewed once in a while. But I think the company/brand as a whole doesnt push a whole lot of money into their marketing...
- belugabob 1 hour 9 min ago
My local football practice pitches (all weather, in a fenced off area, are regularly the scene of inconsiderate parking, with vehicles blocking the...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 27 min ago
Don't forget though "Englishman's home is his castle" - which includes my rights to grow a giant curtain wall of Leylandii to "protect my privacy"....
- Spangly Shiny 1 hour 34 min ago
Assos ASOS anyone?
- chrisonabike 1 hour 48 min ago
Replace them all with Bromptons and they'd take up zero space within days or even hours, as they are all relocated elsewhere. To eBay or possibly...
- Andrewbanshee 2 hours 19 min ago
Where I live we are experiencing a lot of housing development on small and large plots of land. These developers don't seem to have problems...
- hawkinspeter 2 hours 25 min ago
Sometimes peanuts
Add new comment
61 comments
On my 7 minute cycle to work, on an average day I see approxiately: 4 or 5 people in advanced stop zones, 1 or 2 red light jumping at speed, 2 or 3 speeding, 1 or 2 ploughing through zebra crossings either with pedestrians on them or clearly waiting to cross, 2 or 3 turning without indicating, 5 or 6 texting while driving and encounter 1 or 2 close passes and 1 car parked in the small section of cycle lane en route. Plus the occasional misuse of the horn. And similar but slightly less on the way home as the route is less busy at that time. I wouldn't have to go looking for offences, they are commonplace. It wouldn't take a vigilante - just showing what I see on a short journey on relatively quiet route every day during lockdown would make up quite a haul of offences for the Met. If they want to provide me with a camera, I can show them. But I wear my normal clothes - would I still quailify as a vigilante if I'm not lycra-clad?
I would suggest getting at least one. The main reason I got my cameras is to prove that any collision was not my fault. Never had to use it for that, yet, but have lost count of the number of reports I've submitted to the Met for dangerous driving. And my commute has been relatively short compared to other cyclists who have submitted many more.
I consider myself Deputised
A standardisation and streamlining of the reporting process would be welcome here. There is massive variation between police forces in what you have to do to submit dash cam footage, with some forces not even accepting footage submitted by members of the public.
When I make a report I have to fill in an online form making a statement. A word document pro forma statement is emailed to me, which you have to fill in, print, sign, scan and then email back. You are sent a separate email containing a drop box link to then upload the footage (which doesn't always work, or sometimes isn't sent to you) and I have to keep copies of all the documents and the video footage. I have a long cycle commute, so pre lockdown I was making 2 or 3 complaints per week and probably spending the best part of 1 1/2 hours to do it.
without variation in practice innovation is stultified. The time for standardisation is when things approach an optimum. I'd say we have a way to go until a region can claim they have found that.
The counter to that would be that without sharing of practice innovation is also stultified. At the moment, it doesn't appear that there's much sign of different forces learning from each other about what works and building on it.
Uh? If practice is standardised then there is nothing to share. And sharing is in any case not innovation. You need the innovation first in order to have anything new to share.
Yeah, but I didn't say it should be standardised. I'm saying that you need a middle way between one mandated way of doing things and everyone doing their own thing with no reference to each other.
Innovation ex nihilo is exceedingly rare, if it exists at all. It's nearly always the novel synthesis of existing ideas.
I think it is more about a standardised base line. We read on here of some forces not accepting footage, others where you have no idea of the outcome, some forces claiming GDPR.
There needs to be a minimum standard agreed for the steps in the process, leaving forces to decide on the implementation of the steps.
For example, what is the reporting requirement in terms of days? Essex Police used to say 2 days, now on their online form you choose between less than 10 or 10 or more.
Honestly it sounds like you have a relatively good process there. What force is that?
(In my experience,) in Scotland the process is normally:
Hence why I only report stuff when I have lots of free time and I'm feeling motivated, and the vast majority of stuff goes unreported.
That was almsot exactly my experience except:
15+ minutes2 hours after the time they told you till there's actually officers to speak to you. (There often isn't)till they call you (normally on a weekend when I'm trying to spend time with my family, cos they seem to think no one will answer their phone during 9-5 working week.)eventually you call them and are referred back to your local polcia station where you made the complaint, because the appropriate are team have ignored it.They seemed really keen to prosecute - because the vehicle had no VED, no MOT and no insurance. But then they seemed to lose interest.
But then they seemed to lose interest.
Unfortunately, the only way to make progress with a police force which is determined to file complaints about indisputable offences against cyclists straight into the bin, is dogged persistence. You have to make sure that it's more work for them to ignore complaints than to act on them. If they can get away with it, they will lose interest. This leads the repeat offenders to realise that the best response to a NIP is to ignore it- then the police just can't be bothered to follow that up and the dangerous drivers are encouraged.
Let's hope the MET up their game on dealing with footage. Has anyone here submitted footage and had a good result from the MET?
Yes. I and others have had many. Though, from my own experience, this has only been over the last few years. Previously the Met would send a warning letter at best almost every time.
My own videos with details of outcomes: www.youtube.com/themitsky/videos
Excellent - my view of them as being cyclist-hating appears to be out of date.
Yeah, they seem to have changed in the last few years. Apart from the one case of a crystal clear red light jump which they declined to take on saying that the driver was going to fast to stop safely.
Well, that doesn't make any sense to me. If you're going too fast to be able to stop for traffic lights then surely that's careless/dangerous driving as well as jumping the lights.
You'd think that they would apply that logic, which I also argued, but no.
Yes. I've submitted 5 or 6 close passes, all of which have had a NIP. And one actual collision, where no further action.
Hope you weren't hurt in the collision (and I'm surprised they didn't at least send a warning for a collision unless it was unusual circumstances).
I'm glad the MET are taking road crime seriously and hope we get more forces joining the club (Avon & Somerset certainly respond quickly these days). To my mind, it's hugely beneficial for police to act on video evidence as it drastically increases their resources and allows them to effectively be anywhere at anytime (for free!).
I wasn't thanks, nor was there any damage. Apparently in those circumstances, the Met don't take any further action as a matter of policy. So bizarrely, a driver who commits a close pass with no impact (intentionally or otherwise) gets a more stringent follow up than one who actually hits you. Seems illogical, but they're dealt with by different teams within the force with different priorities and procedures. Go figure.
Odd - let's hope they fix that loophole.
Apparently in those circumstances, the Met don't take any further action as a matter of policy
These matters of policy in the various forces around the country should be put together and published whenever the Government claims to be encouraging cycling or 'holding a consultation' on the Highway Code- then the potential new cyclists can see if they're in an area where incidents involving cyclists are essentially filed in the bin.
Unfortunately, you have to keep at them after they claim to have sent a NIP, because they're quite likely to then file them in the bin and assume they've 'done enough', and the driver draws the conclusion they have got away with it again. As a result of my evidence-heavy complaint to a 'person of influence' about Lancashire ignoring really gross red-light crashing, there was a sudden flurry of activity. Some poor old PC at Lancaster was detailed to keep me quiet with a corresponding flurry of NIPs. I have done the first witness statement by email/ post, and the PC may be thinking I am mollified and will forget all about it. If so, he'll be wrong.
You've clearly had bad experiences, but that's not my experience of the Met. All of my complaints have resulted in NIPs followed by a driver awareness course, except one which is going to court
I suppose my dispute is that, whatever the offence, it's the comedy course. If they fail to respond to the NIP, then there's a load of fuss, statements, evidence compilation,followed by... the comedy course when they say they didn't receive the NIP. Consequently, Game Theory indicates to these Chancer Drivers that the logical move is to ignore the NIP. A few points on the licence would induce a change in behaviour- it's only 3 points for crashing a red light, but still a cause for concern with consequences.
It's great that the Met are using the prevalence of cameras to encourage better/safer driving. I actually found myself driving more appropriately when I fitted my own dashcam - the sense that I was being recorded, even by my own dashcam, was salutary.
However it would be better if they did not frame this as cyclists v motorists and thereby stoke the enmity. Why not encourage all dash/helmet cam footage without any bias one way? Yes, I've heard it before, cars/motorists do more damage; but that's not a reason for cyclists to get a free pass on the Highway Code.
I agree with this - when cycling with a camera I'm aware that if I want to make a complaint then I can't be ignoring red lights or cycling over pavements.
As a driver I had a black box fitted by my insurer (it was the only affordable way to add a teenage learner) and it makes you hyperaware of speed limits.
I have to go through the 2 mins after and before to make sure all is ok. Although when I'm just going up a long hill with no houses, it is very boring to watch !
“More people died on our roads nationally than from terrorism and homicide last year, and every year, so you recognise that there’s a real need for safer roads.”
I read somewhere that since terrorism in the UK was first recorded back in the 1970s c3,500 people have died. That equates to 2 years of death by motorists.
That should be shocking to everyone but some will always rabidly insist, "yeah but what about the cyclists?".
Pages