Strider etc - In Car Camera's on a budget?

fivetide

Flyboy152 wrote: »

PACE comes to mind. I am not sure but they will probably be able to use it as evidence that some offence has been committed. If they can use it to prove the other party committed an offence, why can't they use to prove the OP committed one?

I've also seen on biker forums ppolice checking the average speed noted in sat navs!

5t.

Flyboy152

fivetide wrote: »

I've also seen on biker forums ppolice checking the average speed noted in sat navs!

5t.

That would be a complete and utter waste of time, seeing as there would no proof of where that speed as accumulated.

jaydeeuk1

Strider590 wrote: »

I currently use this, lots on ebay, so find the cheapest...... Recharges from USB, records for nearly 2 hours on a full charge, so no need for power, but can also run from 5v usb power adaptor plugged into your cars lighter socket. Has served me VERY well for the last 18 months (once you work out the bugs/quirks).

Im now moving to a new system with a bullet cam + screen + recorder, auto records when the car is turned on, can also auto record on motion/sound detection, retails around £200 and I think all in all it's worth going for. Plus I can drop it into a backpack when I go mountain biking, as it's got a remote control that can be strapped to your arm.
Won't go into action until i've figured out how to make a decent mount for it, without paying the stupid money retailers are asking.

The cheap one's suggested above may look like a bargain, but to me they look as though they'd fall apart on the first speed bump.

What are the quirks with it? I'm currently using my old android handset for this purpose, but the program I wrote needs a better camera, and the handset isn't fast enough for what I need, but these look pretty good.

pulliptears

fivetide wrote: »

This seemed to produce results
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CAR-TAXI-HACKNEY-CAB-DVR-VIDEO-CAMERA-RECORDER-CCTV-/110680261991?pt=UK_Gadgets&hash=item19c50ec567&clk_rvr_id=256958629708

See thread here: http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/driving-incidents-roadrage/114263-merc-damaged-during-mot-test.html

Essentially took his car for test and the chap slammed the bonnet so hard he dented it with his hands. Because they didn't realise the camera was running it was all on film.

5t.

Anyone else gutted to reach the end of that thread and find he'd not posted the video?

vax2002

I think people are confusing a speed camera which has to be approved by secretary of state as a statuary instrument and calibrated as such for purpose of issuing a fixed penalty, with a piece of video footage taken under pace from your on-board camera which would then be shown to a jury to decide guilt.
The police dont have a problem working out how fast you were going when you crashed or in the run up to it, they just plug a laptop in your obdii port and download the stored data, which is not the same as the data the public has access to with simple obdii software.
IMO, they have two sides of a coin, if you drive everywhere like an angel and never exceed the speed limit EVER then they may prove the other driver was at fault, but if you are bit of a boy racer, you could be setting yourself up for a fall

thenudeone

Flyboy152 wrote: »

PACE comes to mind. I am not sure but they will probably be able to use it as evidence that some offence has been committed. If they can use it to prove the other party committed an offence, why can't they use to prove the OP committed one?

It's interesting to explore the issue of seizure further.
This is interesting article (with the relevant links to legislation):
http://www.pixiq.com/article/police-in-england-can-seize-your-camera-as-evidence

But whilst the police are entitled to be in the street (and so can seize a camera as long as they know you have it), they are generally not entitled to be inside your private vehicle. In order to search your vehicle, they would need to suspect that it contained stolen or prohibited articles (section 1 (2) (a))

So - even if they saw your in-car camera and believed it contained evidence of an offence, I don't believe they would have the right to seize it as evidence unless they were legally in your car for another legitimate purpose (eg administering first aid). Discuss!

In any case, the most likely concern of motorists with an in-car camera is to defend false civil claims, which are much more likely that a criminal enquiry.

fivetide

Flyboy152 wrote: »

That would be a complete and utter waste of time, seeing as there would no proof of where that speed as accumulated.

Doesn't matter when the aim is intimidation. My mate had top speed of 140 on his, genuinely achieved at the Nurburgring as he explained to the officer.

Some people would just get in a flap though or it is an excuse to take a closer look at the car/bike etc.

I also saw the police trying to get someone to admit speeding on the basis that their brakes 'seemed' hot.

5t.

Flyboy152

thenudeone wrote: »

It's interesting to explore the issue of seizure further.
This is interesting article (with the relevant links to legislation):
http://www.pixiq.com/article/police-in-england-can-seize-your-camera-as-evidence

But whilst the police are entitled to be in the street (and so can seize a camera as long as they know you have it), they are generally not entitled to be inside your private vehicle. In order to search your vehicle, they would need to suspect that it contained stolen or prohibited articles (section 1 (2) (a))

So - even if they saw your in-car camera and believed it contained evidence of an offence, I don't believe they would have the right to seize it as evidence unless they were legally in your car for another legitimate purpose (eg administering first aid). Discuss!

In any case, the most likely concern of motorists with an in-car camera is to defend false civil claims, which are much more likely that a criminal enquiry.

If you were involved in a collision and they suspected you to be the cause of that act, would they not have the right to search your vehicle for any evidence that might prove their case; such as drink, drugs or rather contraband.

Strider590

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

What are the quirks with it? I'm currently using my old android handset for this purpose, but the program I wrote needs a better camera, and the handset isn't fast enough for what I need, but these look pretty good.

Ok.....

It has an auto power off after 30s if it's not recording, normally this is fine, BUT if you start recording too soon after turning it on (within a second or two), the 30s counts down anyway and turns off the camera.

It over records the oldest file, so in theory never runs out of space..... However if the oldest file is say 300mb and the one it's recording is 500mb for example, it'll mess up the master file table and require a reformat of the memory card, you'll lose all footage. It's like trying to put a litre of water into a half litre bottle.
The more daylight + movement, the bigger the file.
The key is to periodically clean out the memory card (which isn't any hassle).

Time/date is easy to set, but only once you get your head around it.
(I'll happily explain this to anyone who buys one)

The switch at the rear of the unit is more like a reset button and should only ever be used if there's a problem.

Those are the main things, bare those in mind and it will make a very good in car camera. The image quality is excellent, better than some £100+ camera's and it's highly portable.

Cash-Strapped.T32

This thread has got me thinking about getting something like this for my bike - Since I commute every day on it (apx 1K miles per month, more than half on the m1) I see just as much craziness as any car driver particularly on the motorways & unfortunately, being on a bike it's easy for anyone just to try & blame the biker in any given accident or situation.


I mean, case in point or what;
My recent hit & run where the car took me out on an empty roundabout was a nightmare.
(guy cut into my lane bang infront of me because he'd gone for the wrong exit)
Driver left the scene, & I had no idea of the plate, so I simply didn't dare inform anyone in case I ended up having to pay for the damage which I could not have afforded.

MIB no good as I couldn't have afforded their excess had the repairs cost £300 or £3k, so I just had to sit on my injuries & pray that when I was able to inspect it there was no damage to the bike, and keep shtum to the police, insurance, everyone.
In the end it was only cosmetic, but that's only down to pure dumb-luck & a sturdy choice of bike..

A camera like that would have been if not a life-saver, then at least a bike-saver, because then I'd have been safely able to claim against the driver's insurance, and not play the Deal or No-Deal game with the MIB.



Anyhow, I think one like Strider posted, which looks like I could manufacture a bracket quite simply, and could be covered with a jiffy-bag or something in the wet (I already do this with my sat-nav, !!!!!! those expensive biker-navs or scrote-toms or whatever).

The only tricky thing I'd have to do is work out a fool-proof way to wire it up such that it always came on & began recording with the ignition?
(perhaps if I feed a cheeky wire from the headlights' connectors as they always come on automatically, after a few secs delay to avoid burdening the batt).


Any thoughts? I'm not suggesting this to record super-cool, scaring old lady stunts, I mean entirely in the spirit of protecting myself from claims against me, or proving that there was even a 3rd party present..

Before the other week it had never occurred to me;
In almost any accident, the biker will be biffing on the floor, and the driver has every choice whether to stay or choose to leave, and there's nothing I can do about it..
In those circumstances I'm actually starting to think a camera of some sort is pretty damn useful.