Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Stoke
    • By Stoke 11th Oct 17, 12:19 PM
    • 1,998Posts
    • 842Thanks
    Stoke
    Are drivers 'at-fault' obligated to provide their dash cam?
    • #1
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:19 PM
    Are drivers 'at-fault' obligated to provide their dash cam? 11th Oct 17 at 12:19 PM
    I witnessed an accident this morning and had to stop. The driver of the car 'at-fault' (in my opinion) had a dash cam in his car. I mentioned to one of the non-fault vehicles drivers that he should try to obtain the footage, as it will obviously clear up who's at fault. Obviously the police were called, as well as an ambulance.

    However, the driver of the vehicle 'at-fault' has supposedly told the police that no dash cam was in the car and the police failed to obtain it.

    Got me thinking? Do you have to incriminate yourself if you haven't declared the dash cam to your insurance? It is evidence, but we have the right the silence, do we have the right to withhold something that would incriminate us?
Page 1
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 11th Oct 17, 12:28 PM
    • 670 Posts
    • 341 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    • #2
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:28 PM
    • #2
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:28 PM
    The simple answer is yes, you have a right to silence.
    • ratrace
    • By ratrace 11th Oct 17, 12:32 PM
    • 476 Posts
    • 323 Thanks
    ratrace
    • #3
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:32 PM
    • #3
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:32 PM
    Well its not a requirement yet by law so its up to the individual if they want to disclose any footage they have to the insurance company's so

    Morally = yes
    Legally = no
    People are caught up in an egotistic artificial rat race to display a false image to society. We want the biggest house, fanciest car, and we don't mind paying the sky high mortgage to put up that show. We sacrifice our biggest assets our health and time, We feel happy when we see people look up to us and see how successful we are”

    Rat Race
    • wgl2014
    • By wgl2014 11th Oct 17, 12:56 PM
    • 417 Posts
    • 247 Thanks
    wgl2014
    • #4
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:56 PM
    • #4
    • 11th Oct 17, 12:56 PM
    As above, however I would add that if Police were in attendance and suspected a criminal offence (due care etc) they could seize the dash cam to retrieve the footage.
    • Stoke
    • By Stoke 11th Oct 17, 1:57 PM
    • 1,998 Posts
    • 842 Thanks
    Stoke
    • #5
    • 11th Oct 17, 1:57 PM
    • #5
    • 11th Oct 17, 1:57 PM
    As above, however I would add that if Police were in attendance and suspected a criminal offence (due care etc) they could seize the dash cam to retrieve the footage.
    Originally posted by wgl2014
    I think the police were concerned due to the nature of the accident and the injuries to one of the guys involved so were a bit distracted. I mentioned to the police officer that there was a dash cam in the car, but he's clearly not had a chance to seize it and then once the vehicles were recovered, the dash cam has been taken out.

    I don't blame the bloke for removing the camera. I think he has a hard time proving he wasn't at fault, but a dash cam with footage isn't going to help his case is it?
    • n217970
    • By n217970 11th Oct 17, 4:12 PM
    • 241 Posts
    • 177 Thanks
    n217970
    • #6
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:12 PM
    • #6
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:12 PM
    I have a dash cam in my car and have to admit that if thought I was at fault the SD card would disappear very quickly.
    • Ebe Scrooge
    • By Ebe Scrooge 11th Oct 17, 4:29 PM
    • 4,014 Posts
    • 3,434 Thanks
    Ebe Scrooge
    • #7
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:29 PM
    • #7
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:29 PM
    It's an interesting question, for sure.


    My take on it would be that, since a dash-cam is not a legally-required piece of kit, then you can't be forced to hand it over. It would be different if it were a legal requirement, and was factory-installed into all new cars. But since it's purely optional, I can't see how the police could ( legally ) insist you hand it over. Indeed, if you put it out of sight before they arrive, how can they even prove you have one ? I may, of course, be totally wrong - but that's just my view.
    I may not know much about art, but I know what I like.
    • jack_pott
    • By jack_pott 11th Oct 17, 4:50 PM
    • 4,292 Posts
    • 5,515 Thanks
    jack_pott
    • #8
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:50 PM
    • #8
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:50 PM
    If a murderer doesn't hand over the gun, the police can seize it. I would have thought the same applies here, except that the amount of resource the police are willing to expend on a traffic offence will be different.
    I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.
    Friedrich Nietzsche
    • Nobbie1967
    • By Nobbie1967 11th Oct 17, 4:52 PM
    • 680 Posts
    • 784 Thanks
    Nobbie1967
    • #9
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:52 PM
    • #9
    • 11th Oct 17, 4:52 PM
    It's an interesting question, for sure.


    My take on it would be that, since a dash-cam is not a legally-required piece of kit, then you can't be forced to hand it over. It would be different if it were a legal requirement, and was factory-installed into all new cars. But since it's purely optional, I can't see how the police could ( legally ) insist you hand it over. Indeed, if you put it out of sight before they arrive, how can they even prove you have one ? I may, of course, be totally wrong - but that's just my view.
    Originally posted by Ebe Scrooge
    As said earlier, if the police suspect an offence has been committed and the owner of the dash cam wiped the footage. Then this may be construed as disposing of evidence under the offence of Perverting the course of justice.
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 11th Oct 17, 6:15 PM
    • 329 Posts
    • 210 Thanks
    debtdebt
    I have a dash cam in my car and have to admit that if thought I was at fault the SD card would disappear very quickly.
    Originally posted by n217970
    So you'd provide a version of events which is inconsistent with what was recorded and try to shift blame to the other driver?
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 11th Oct 17, 6:30 PM
    • 670 Posts
    • 341 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    So you'd provide a version of events which is inconsistent with what was recorded and try to shift blame to the other driver?
    Originally posted by debtdebt
    Or to put it another way, his guilty is clear so why give the police any more evidence.

    Any decent defence solicitor would give the same advice prior to interview.
    • Ebe Scrooge
    • By Ebe Scrooge 11th Oct 17, 6:33 PM
    • 4,014 Posts
    • 3,434 Thanks
    Ebe Scrooge
    If a murderer doesn't hand over the gun, the police can seize it. I would have thought the same applies here, except that the amount of resource the police are willing to expend on a traffic offence will be different.
    Originally posted by jack_pott
    OK - but a gun is an illegal item, so presumably there are specific laws in place to allow the police to seize it, just like drugs. But can they seize something which is not illegal to own, especially if they can't prove that you even own it ? So they come up to your car, "Excuse me Sir, do you have a dash-cam ?" . "No, officer". "Prove to me that you don't". "You prove to me that I do". "May I search your car ?". "No, not without good reason".

    Dunno, I'm no expert - but it's certainly an interesting talking point
    I may not know much about art, but I know what I like.
    • wgl2014
    • By wgl2014 11th Oct 17, 6:46 PM
    • 417 Posts
    • 247 Thanks
    wgl2014
    Without getting into a lengthy explanation of Police powers there is a power to seize evidence relating to a suspected offence. If the officer didn't see a dashcam but a witness told them that one was removed and hidden there would also be a power to search the vehicle.

    In most cases where there was no serious injuries or any other offences it's unlikely Police would be interested however the powers are there.

    IIRC some bikers ended up being prosecuted after one of the group did something daft and his dashcam footage was reviewed.
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 11th Oct 17, 6:58 PM
    • 670 Posts
    • 341 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    Without getting into a lengthy explanation of Police powers there is a power to seize evidence relating to a suspected offence. If the officer didn't see a dashcam but a witness told them that one was removed and hidden there would also be a power to search the vehicle.

    In most cases where there was no serious injuries or any other offences it's unlikely Police would be interested however the powers are there.

    IIRC some bikers ended up being prosecuted after one of the group did something daft and his dashcam footage was reviewed.
    Originally posted by wgl2014
    Go on then under what act?

    The dash cam is neither stolen or prohibited and isn't suspected to be used for the commission of other offences. So how do they search the vehicle?

    S19 PACE gives the power to seize if lawfully on premises.
    S18 and S32 refer to premises searching relating to an arrest.
    • Ebe Scrooge
    • By Ebe Scrooge 11th Oct 17, 6:58 PM
    • 4,014 Posts
    • 3,434 Thanks
    Ebe Scrooge
    Without getting into a lengthy explanation of Police powers there is a power to seize evidence relating to a suspected offence.
    Originally posted by wgl2014
    I was just about to edit my previous post to add something similar. If an offence has been committed then yes, the Police do have powers to seize any relevant evidence. But in an everyday "accident", they're usually not interested. Yes, they'll breathalyse all parties, yes, they'll make sure everyone is licensed, insured, MOT'd, etc. They'll satisfy themselves that no-one was speeding, driving recklessly, whatever. But if no "offence" has been committed ( which, let's face it, is the normal outcome in the majority of collisions ), then it's for the insurance companies to argue it out as to who was blame. An accident is just that - and that's what insurance is for. The Police won't ( and shouldn't ) be interested, other than getting the road cleared to keep the traffic flowing.
    Last edited by Ebe Scrooge; 11-10-2017 at 7:01 PM.
    I may not know much about art, but I know what I like.
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 11th Oct 17, 6:59 PM
    • 670 Posts
    • 341 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    OK - but a gun is an illegal item, so presumably there are specific laws in place to allow the police to seize it, just like drugs. But can they seize something which is not illegal to own, especially if they can't prove that you even own it ? So they come up to your car, "Excuse me Sir, do you have a dash-cam ?" . "No, officer". "Prove to me that you don't". "You prove to me that I do". "May I search your car ?". "No, not without good reason".

    Dunno, I'm no expert - but it's certainly an interesting talking point
    Originally posted by Ebe Scrooge
    He's !!!!ed if they seize the vehicle and the dash cam is in there though.
    • Cremear
    • By Cremear 11th Oct 17, 6:59 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Cremear
    If Police suspect there’s been a crime they have the power to seize anything they may suspect is evidence. If it’s just an ‘accident’ they have no power to seize as there is no offence.
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 11th Oct 17, 7:00 PM
    • 670 Posts
    • 341 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    If Police suspect there’s been a crime they have the power to seize anything they may suspect is evidence. If it’s just an ‘accident’ they have no power to seize as there is no offence.
    Originally posted by Cremear
    Careless driving is a crime.
    • wgl2014
    • By wgl2014 11th Oct 17, 7:59 PM
    • 417 Posts
    • 247 Thanks
    wgl2014
    Go on then under what act?

    The dash cam is neither stolen or prohibited and isn't suspected to be used for the commission of other offences. So how do they search the vehicle?

    S19 PACE gives the power to seize if lawfully on premises.
    S18 and S32 refer to premises searching relating to an arrest.
    Originally posted by Warwick Hunt
    You've said it yourself, S19 (a vehicle is classed as premises for this act). S23 also applies to what can be seized and includes items that may be evidence of a crime.

    That then leaves the officer the need to be lawfully in the vehicle. This could be with the owners consent or if a suitable offence is suspected by arresting them and using S18 for the vehicle.
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 11th Oct 17, 8:02 PM
    • 329 Posts
    • 210 Thanks
    debtdebt
    Sorry officer, there was no SD card in the dash cam. I had taken it out to look at scenery from my previous drive and forgot to put it back in.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

5,062Posts Today

6,815Users online

Martin's Twitter