On board cameras.

[BensGrandad]

Was coming from Dyke Rd to A23 yesterday on tha A27 and a prat decided at the last moment that he was in the wrong lane to turn left so pulled over signalling as he came over causing wife to swerve violently and very nearly hitting the safety barriers. As a result am considering buying an in car camera for any future incidents, but couple of questions, would it catch such a movement in any direction or is it just straight ahead and is the film acceptable as evidence either criminal or for insurance claim purposes.

 

[BensGrandad]

Has anybody got 1 and it helped a claim?

 

[dazzer6666]

Links to most things you need to know here- scroll down the page

http://www.racshop.co.uk/sat-navs-tech/dash-cam.html

 

[BensGrandad]

Links to most things you need to know here- scroll down the page

http://www.racshop.co.uk/sat-navs-tech/dash-cam.html

This is the usual advertising claims but what I am asking has anybody actually bought one and benefited from having it to win a claim.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

This is the usual advertising claims but what I am asking has anybody actually bought one and benefited from having it to win a claim.

I bought a dashboard camera but have not used it to make a claim but did produce footage of some idiot throwing rubbish out on the verges. Don't know what the police did about it,but they are useful.

 

[surrey jim]

have a read of this BG https://nortr3nixy.nimpr.uk/showthread.php?329248-Dash-Cams

 

[BensGrandad]

Thanks for the link I didnt realize it had been mentioned previously. My concern is whether or not the screen is a distraction or can that be turned off and camera still operate. I suppose it depends on the actual camera purchased.

 

[Postman Pat]

This seems like a good article to read:

http://www.driving.co.uk/car-clinic/buying-guide-leading-dashboard-cameras-dash-cams-reviewed/

 

[studio150]

and is the film acceptable as evidence either criminal or for insurance claim purposes.

Your insurance company would welcome any footage if you go ahead and get one as it adds to witness accounts and builds a better understanding who is at fault.But don't overlook if you are at fault for the accident the footage could be used against you.

 

[seagullsslimjim]

I bought one so that i could film meteorites and put it on You Tube !

 

[Lady Whistledown]

All well & good if somebody else has cocked up and caused you a problem.

But if you screw up and run some pedestrian over, or pull out in front of another car, and cause a prang, then it's equally going to work against you too.

 

[middletoenail]

All well & good if somebody else has cocked up and caused you a problem.

But if you screw up and run some pedestrian over, or pull out in front of another car, and cause a prang, then it's equally going to work against you too.

Would you not disconnect it ASAP in that instance?

 

[Official Old Man]

I have them in all my cars (Me, Wife, Daughter & in van).
Bought the cheapo ones at the petrol station at £17 and they seem to work plus a £120 for my expensive car. I've rewound a couple of times in car to see an incident of cars jumping lights etc.
After a few trips you do not notice them. Mine has a park mode which works by sensor for car park door scratches but if I rewound that I'd get idiots sticking their tongues out at the camera I expect.
For the few quid outlay they are worth it for that time when you wish you had one.

 

[brightn'ove]

Thanks for the link I didnt realize it had been mentioned previously. My concern is whether or not the screen is a distraction or can that be turned off and camera still operate. I suppose it depends on the actual camera purchased.

A lot of them don't have screens, they just sit there and record, you view the footage on your computer.

 

[father_and_son]

Was coming from Dyke Rd to A23 yesterday on tha A27 and a prat decided at the last moment that he was in the wrong lane to turn left so pulled over signalling as he came over causing wife to swerve violently and very nearly hitting the safety barriers. As a result am considering buying an in car camera for any future incidents, but couple of questions, would it catch such a movement in any direction or is it just straight ahead and is the film acceptable as evidence either criminal or for insurance claim purposes.

I am Chief Underwriting Officer for a motor insurance company, one of the very few that will soon be offering onboard cameras to its customers as part of an upgrade to a telematics (black box) proposition.

There are two basic types... front only and front&rear. There are no panoramic versions out there (and it wouldn't work anyway as the driver, passenger, seat backs and windscreen columns etc would always block some of the view - short of turning you car into some sort of Google-Street-View-Camera-Car, nothing will give you 360 vision.


No UK insurance company accepts video evidence "as standard", however, video and telematics (black box) data has been used to make another insurer 'back down' during liability arguments, but nothing [yet] has any basis in law and they have no back up under the Road Traffic Act.
However, from the details you describe, however bad this will sound... Your wife was at fault. She should have left sufficient space between her and the car in front to react. At best you might get "contributory negligence" from the other driver, however, that still would have meant an "at fault" claim on her policy and possible loss of no claims bonus and certainly an excess to pay. [The other insurer may pay 25-50% of the costs but it really wouldn't help her, just her insurer]. If you had been sideswiped then the camera wouldn't have picked it up and wouldn't help in apportioning blame (a telematics box would have though).

The only common accident type that cameras protect you from are is the person in front of you reverses into you and subsequently claims you ran into them. At some point in the near future an insurer will take a case to court and get this sort of evidence enshrined in case law, but it will be extremely costly and, as yet, no one [in the UK] has.


From a criminal perspective, I very much doubt that the courts will allow any evidence that could be tampered with by one party or the other. Independent video footage is a different matter (so footage of two cars in front of you in a collision that didn't otherwise involve you or CCTV from an independent source), but evidence gathered by one or other party would be challenged. Changing timestamps, lack of proof of identity, digital tampering... all give "reasonable doubt" to any evidence like this.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

I am Chief Underwriting Officer for a motor insurance company, one of the very few that will soon be offering onboard cameras to its customers as part of an upgrade to a telematics (black box) proposition.

There are two basic types... front only and front&rear. There are no panoramic versions out there (and it wouldn't work anyway as the driver, passenger, seat backs and windscreen columns etc would always block some of the view - short of turning you car into some sort of Google-Street-View-Camera-Car, nothing will give you 360 vision.


No UK insurance company accepts video evidence "as standard", however, video and telematics (black box) data has been used to make another insurer 'back down' during liability arguments, but nothing [yet] has any basis in law and they have no back up under the Road Traffic Act.
However, from the details you describe, however bad this will sound... Your wife was at fault. She should have left sufficient space between her and the car in front to react. At best you might get "contributory negligence" from the other driver, however, that still would have meant an "at fault" claim on her policy and possible loss of no claims bonus and certainly an excess to pay. [The other insurer may pay 25-50% of the costs but it really wouldn't help her, just her insurer]. If you had been sideswiped then the camera wouldn't have picked it up and wouldn't help in apportioning blame (a telematics box would have though).

The only common accident type that cameras protect you from are is the person in front of you reverses into you and subsequently claims you ran into them. At some point in the near future an insurer will take a case to court and get this sort of evidence enshrined in case law, but it will be extremely costly and, as yet, no one [in the UK] has.


From a criminal perspective, I very much doubt that the courts will allow any evidence that could be tampered with by one party or the other. Independent video footage is a different matter (so footage of two cars in front of you in a collision that didn't otherwise involve you or CCTV from an independent source), but evidence gathered by one or other party would be challenged. Changing timestamps, lack of proof of identity, digital tampering... all give "reasonable doubt" to any evidence like this.

Surely if his wife is in say Lane 1 and the driver swerves fromn Lane 2 into Lane 1 she cannot be at fault otherwise you could just go around broadsiding vehciles and saying the didn't leave enough space? Maybe I'm mistaken but that is what I think BG is saying?

 

[father_and_son]

Surely if his wife is in say Lane 1 and the driver swerves fromn Lane 2 into Lane 1 she cannot be at fault otherwise you could just go around broadsiding vehciles and saying the didn't leave enough space? Maybe I'm mistaken but that is what I think BG is saying?

Being sideswiped is different and, yes, that would be the lane changer's fault. However, if [as I read BG's OP] someone changes lane in front of you and you hit them, then you are at fault [in insurance terms]. They may be guilty of driving without due care or possibly even dangerous driving, but they isn't an influencing factor in determining liability (because the court's may be happy to take 6months+ to bring a prosecution, but you aren't going to wait 6 months for your car to be repaired because the insurers are awaiting the outcome of the court case before deciding which will pay for the repair).

 

[BensGrandad]

Surely if his wife is in say Lane 1 and the driver swerves fromn Lane 2 into Lane 1 she cannot be at fault otherwise you could just go around broadsiding vehciles and saying the didn't leave enough space? Maybe I'm mistaken but that is what I think BG is saying?

That is what happened the driver of the other car could have accelerated and pulled in as there was nothing in front of our car but it was a case of the car just pulling into the lane and not seeing my wife in that lane. I would have thought that it was no fault of hers, as she couldnt be expected to have him just cut her up by pulling in with no warning or looking. Had my wife not swerved the other car would have hit her frong door not she hit it.