URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       FreeTrafficLegalAdvice
  HTML https://ftla.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: The Flame Pit
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 13869--------------------------------------------------
       NextBase - Reporting prosecutions?
   DIR By: guest46
       Date: January 17, 2024, 3:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Has anyone any experience of Nextbase? some social media
       (cycling) types are claiming when road traffic offences are
       rpeorted using their images, they are able to get confirmation
       from WMP about the action taken (e.g. the driver was fined)   -
       how would the decision (particularly if fixed-penalty) become
       known to a member of the public unaffected by the 'crime'?
       am I missing something or is this just social media fake news?
       #Post#: 13919--------------------------------------------------
       Re: NextBase - Reporting prosecutions?
   DIR By: ivanleo
       Date: January 17, 2024, 6:12 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I've had a pair of nextbase cameras (front and rear) and used
       them for prosecutions on many an occasion, most recently I
       reported one idiot in my local area doing 20 in a 30 cos he was
       distracted by the youtube videos he was watching on the phone
       mounted in the middle of his windscreen. The footage is good
       enough that you can actually see the bloke in the driver's
       video, even though it was being filmed from my car which was
       behind the offender (so through my windscreen and his rear
       window).
       Also got another local idiot overtaking at a junction across
       double white lines where there have been a number of fatalities
       over the past few years.
       My best result however was in London where I got a moped river
       for flying through a junction in contravention of a red ATS, he
       didn't respond to the NIP so he got done for s172, as he had six
       points already he got a six month ban.
       The level of detail about the outcome varies from one force to
       another. Kent's system is totally kaput so there's no point in
       reporting anything but back in the day they used to give you the
       outcome, Essex has a lookup function so you can search the case
       reference and it tells you the result, the Met will tell you the
       outcome if you ask them but they're very busy so you might have
       to chase it up a few times.
       Unfortunately my local force (Norfolk Police) only tell you that
       a NIP has been issued but they don't tell you the outcome as
       they say this would be too taxing on their resources.
       I have to say I can't see why the make of the camera would have
       any impact on whether you can find out the outcome.
       #Post#: 13924--------------------------------------------------
       Re: NextBase - Reporting prosecutions?
   DIR By: guest46
       Date: January 18, 2024, 2:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I wasn't suggesting anything pejorative about the camera maker,
       other than NB seem to make a point of having a whole webpage
       about how to with links etc. The cheap Chinese ones I suspect do
       not.
       #Post#: 14234--------------------------------------------------
       Re: NextBase - Reporting prosecutions?
   DIR By: The Slithy Tove
       Date: January 24, 2024, 1:34 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       As CP says, it varies from force to force. My only experience is
       with Surrey and Thames Valley. If the evidence is good enough,
       Surrey will tell you that they are pursuing it, giving a list of
       options they will take from a letter up to prosecution.
       Presumably that is basically telling you that they are issuing
       an NIP. My one and only submission to Thames Valley was less
       informative. Having submitted the video, description, etc.,
       their stock message seems to say they can pursue it only if they
       have corroborating evidence from an independent source. That
       makes no sense as I was the independent source (was only a
       witness and had no part in the offender in front jumping the red
       light), and there is unlikely to be any other evidence. Silence
       follows. Makes me less inclined to go through the effort if I
       see something in TVP's patch again.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1