Police sent more footage of dangerous driving than ever before – as officers warn “goal is to make roads safer, not target drivers”
Avon and Somerset Police received 8,595 videos of alleged road offences from motorists and cyclists in 2024, 90 per cent of which resulted in some form of action being taken
Avon and Somerset Police says the local community is “speaking really loudly” about dangerous behaviour on the roads, as video submissions of alleged driving offences to the Operation SNAP third-party reporting portal continue to rise.
In 2024, Avon and Somerset Police received 8,595 video reports from both cyclists and motorists of alleged road safety incidents, such as close passes, phone driving, and road rage, just over 300 more than the previous year.
2,539 of those resulted in notices of intended prosecution being sent to the drivers responsible, while 5,158 were dealt with through warning letters, meaning almost 90 per cent of all submissions led to “some form of action” being taken.
4,662 of those led to a Notice of Intended Prosecution being served, with 85 per cent of the reports made by cyclists leading to action being taken, compared to the quarter of submissions from motorists that were dismissed. Almost a third of the force’s reports came from Bristol.
And speaking to the BBC this week, Avon and Somerset’s chief inspector Rob Cheeseman said the force is being sent more footage from cyclists and motorists than ever before.
“I think that’s due to just how more popular certain camera use is, particularly with dashcams in vehicles,” Cheeseman said.
“So more potential offences are being identified by other road users, which are then being submitted to us.”
However, due to the ever-increasing volume of clips being submitted through Operation SNAP, Avon and Somerset Police has admitted that it is forced to focus on the “most urgent cases first” – while noting that the third-party reporting tool is not a means to “target drivers unnecessary”.
“It’s certainly something which we’ve had to adapt to,” Cheeseman said of the recent rise in third-party video reporting.
“It’s certainly a more relatively new version of reporting crime to the police. The community is speaking really loudly that these are dangers on the road.
“The goal is not to be targeting drivers unnecessarily – the ultimate goal is making the roads safer for everyone in Avon and Somerset.”
While Avon and Somerset Police has received around 20,000 video submissions of driving offences over the past five years, one local camera cyclist – Guy Buckland – has been responsible for 1,300 of them.
“People have to realise the impact that bad driving has on peoples’ lives and communities,” Buckland, who says 90 per cent of his submissions have resulted in warning letters, fixed penalties, and court action, told the BBC.
The cyclist says some close passes he’s submitted to the portal involved drivers overtaking with six inches of him, although he noted this was quite rare.
“More typical are people pulling out without looking, people overtaking in the face of oncoming cars, the sort of general close passes, and occasionally mobile phone use,” he said.
The research saw data from 30 police forces collected, showing that 201,630 Operation SNAP cases were logged between January 2021 and April 2024.
A combined 44,791 were logged in 2021/22, followed by 66,515 in 2022/23, the number rising again to 85,114 in 2023/24, with Avon and Somerset topping the table with 19,949 submissions. Of the 30 forces, all saw an increase in the number of reports over the three-year period, while just two (Norfolk and Suffolk’s police forces) saw a decrease between 2022/23 and 2023/24.
Meanwhile, even forces who have implemented the system have come in for criticism for a perceived lack of action – often blamed on the large volume of clips submitted and a lack of resources – or their definition of what constitutes a road safety ‘offence’.
We were also contacted last year by a reader who told us Thames Valley Police had instructed her to stop reporting close passes unless there is evidence of careless driving, creating some confusion about whether the act of close passing a cyclist itself is not actually sufficient evidence of careless or dangerous driving.
Thames Valley Police recently admitted, too, that there are “very valid concerns” about its handling of cyclists’ reports, the force recruiting to fill a “shortage in resources” and staff that has meant “Notice of Intended Prosecutions are not able to be sent to the offending driver within the legal timeframe of 14 days”.
Of course, the rise in third-party reporting in the UK has also coincided with growing criticism of camera cyclists, especially well-known social media figures such as Cycling Mikey.
In October, after covering the rapid growth in third-party road safety reporting in a news article and in a BBC Breakfast segment, the BBC was criticised by cyclists for referring to both Cycling Mikey (real name Mike van Erp) and fellow social media camera cyclist Tim on Two Wheels as “vigilantes”, with Van Erp arguing that cyclists who submit footage to the police are, in fact, the “opposite of vigilantes”.
Following a number of complaints, including from Tim himself, who described the “vigilante” reference as “disappointing”, the broadcaster admitted to road.cc that the initial language used in their story, later amended, was “inappropriate”.
Help us to fund our site
We’ve noticed you’re using an ad blocker. If you like road.cc, but you don’t like ads, please consider subscribing to the site to support us directly. As a subscriber you can read road.cc ad-free, from as little as £1.99.
If you don’t want to subscribe, please turn your ad blocker off. The revenue from adverts helps to fund our site.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Or... the goal is to make the roads safer not target decent drivers.
This was clearly implied by the context. Lose the chip on your shoulder.
Hmm... well if police are stepping up that's good (but of course without more declared funding presumably something else is being let slide). The quote is:
Quote:
due to the ever-increasing volume of clips being submitted through Operation SNAP, Avon and Somerset Police has admitted that it is forced to focus on the “most urgent cases first” – while noting that the third-party reporting tool is not a means to “target drivers unnecessary”.
So they're already saying they're making a selection of the ones the public take the time and effort to report - no, it definitely sounds like they're reassuring (bad) drivers!
On the "chip on shoulder" - it's evident there's massive variation on what police consider eg. "urgent cases" between forces. So in eg. Lancs or Scotland (the latter still doesn't have a portal at all as police keep saying no) making the roads safer seems to have a very low target.
with 85 per cent of the reports made by cyclists leading to action being taken, compared to the quarter of submissions from motorists that were dismissed.
That's a rather cheeky manipulation of numbers worthy of the pro-motoring lobby there, "85% of reports made by cyclists leading to action being taken compared to 75% of reports made by motorists leading to action" would be less dramatic but also rather less disingenuous.
Those figures are also just percentages OF the number of reports by both road users.
It doesn't indicate who actually submits more...
Given cyclists who report drivers get a lot of flack, it would be good to know if (as has been stated by CyclingMikey, and possibly others) that the majority of dangerous driving reports are submitted BY OTHER DRIVERS.
Ive never seen the figures broken down by who reports them, you can kind of infer things from stats, like Ive seen them break it down as careless,close pass, traffic light, etc etc. Youd presume all close passes come from cyclists, whereas the rest you probably assume more likely drivers, maybe ?
Ive always assumed the majority of reports are drivers since, theres endless videos from drivers cams on youtube, whilst NMOTD is the only cyclist equiv and that feels like its peaked in volumes.
Theee are figures out there on splits - I've seen them on road.cc before.
As I recall more drivers submit cam footage than cyclists but cyclists get more positive actions taken which suggests they are better judges of what warrants unsafe behaviours.
From just a raw numbers stand point, I would >expect< more reporting from drivers, as there are many more drives than cyclists. But what >percentage< of cyclists and drivers report? And of those, what >percentage< get acted upon?
"Upride" has regular posting of close passes etc. it does seem to have a very Australian bias (in its comments, at least) and appears to reflect a direct correlation between hours of sunshine and excess hatred of cyclists
Add new comment
38 comments
Hmm... well if police are stepping up that's good (but of course without more declared funding presumably something else is being let slide). The quote is:
So they're already saying they're making a selection of the ones the public take the time and effort to report - no, it definitely sounds like they're reassuring (bad) drivers!
On the "chip on shoulder" - it's evident there's massive variation on what police consider eg. "urgent cases" between forces. So in eg. Lancs or Scotland (the latter still doesn't have a portal at all as police keep saying no) making the roads safer seems to have a very low target.
The context was the increased number of reports of confirmed dangerous driving. What would decent drivers be getting reported to the police for?
That's a rather cheeky manipulation of numbers worthy of the pro-motoring lobby there, "85% of reports made by cyclists leading to action being taken compared to 75% of reports made by motorists leading to action" would be less dramatic but also rather less disingenuous.
Those figures are also just percentages OF the number of reports by both road users.
It doesn't indicate who actually submits more...
Given cyclists who report drivers get a lot of flack, it would be good to know if (as has been stated by CyclingMikey, and possibly others) that the majority of dangerous driving reports are submitted BY OTHER DRIVERS.
Ive never seen the figures broken down by who reports them, you can kind of infer things from stats, like Ive seen them break it down as careless,close pass, traffic light, etc etc. Youd presume all close passes come from cyclists, whereas the rest you probably assume more likely drivers, maybe ?
Ive always assumed the majority of reports are drivers since, theres endless videos from drivers cams on youtube, whilst NMOTD is the only cyclist equiv and that feels like its peaked in volumes.
Theee are figures out there on splits - I've seen them on road.cc before.
As I recall more drivers submit cam footage than cyclists but cyclists get more positive actions taken which suggests they are better judges of what warrants unsafe behaviours.
From just a raw numbers stand point, I would >expect< more reporting from drivers, as there are many more drives than cyclists. But what >percentage< of cyclists and drivers report? And of those, what >percentage< get acted upon?
"Upride" has regular posting of close passes etc. it does seem to have a very Australian bias (in its comments, at least) and appears to reflect a direct correlation between hours of sunshine and excess hatred of cyclists
Pages