Witnessed an accident where driver didn't stop - what should I do?

casseus

luckyduck83 wrote: »

Just watched back my dashcam footage. Interestingly I say to myself "And she was on her phone".

I don't actually remember that and you can't see it from the footage, but it explains why she suddenly drove into another car.

The evidential test on mobile phone footage is can the phone be seen, can the gender of the person using it be identified, and there's the usual 14 days from the date offence to issue any kind of letter to the registered keeper.


If there is no evidence other your oral statement in the video, then it unlikely action will be taken on the mobile phone stance.

Edit: Please do hop along to you're local police explain the situation to them. It could mean a fault claim turn into a non fault claim for that poor motorist who got hit.

luckyduck83

I've emailed the Met, I'll wait and see if they come back to me asking for the footage.

Deanston

casseus wrote: »

The evidential test on mobile phone footage is can the phone be seen, can the gender of the person using it be identified, and there's the usual 14 days from the date offence to issue any kind of letter to the registered keeper.


If there is no evidence other your oral statement in the video, then it unlikely action will be taken on the mobile phone stance.

Edit: Please do hop along to you're local police explain the situation to them. It could mean a fault claim turn into a non fault claim for that poor motorist who got hit.

None of that is true, they have six months do deal with it.

No NIP is needed for a mobile phone offence and even if there was there’s been an accident.

You’ve just made it up or posted in ignorance.

luckyduck83

The police replied with a link to "report a traffic accident". After working my way around all the "were you the driver or the third party" questions, it eventually came to uploading the video. At that point I got a 504 Gateway Timeout - whatever that is.

So I had to start all over again.

Only to get another 504 Gateway Timeout.

I've spent 45mins of my day doing this and have got nowhere, so I give up. Good on the woman on the phone who didn't stop. As far as I'm concerned, she got away with it.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

luckyduck83 wrote: »

The police replied with a link to "report a traffic accident". After working my way around all the "were you the driver or the third party" questions, it eventually came to uploading the video. At that point I got a 504 Gateway Timeout - whatever that is.

So I had to start all over again.

Only to get another 504 Gateway Timeout.

I've spent 45mins of my day doing this and have got nowhere, so I give up. Good on the woman on the phone who didn't stop. As far as I'm concerned, she got away with it.

So! why is it so hard to attend a police station?
Why is it so hard to call your local police station?


Its not good on the woman on the phone who didn't stop, its shame on the person who has the evidence but could only be bothered so much as to give up after an email and e-form failure. You're going to let them get away with it if that is the only effort you wish to put into it.
Plenty of advice on here saying attend a station, why is it you wish not to follow what you have asked?


Do you want to help or not?


They're site is having technical difficulties right now, so jump in car with footage on disc got to local station hand it in.

I've spent 45mins of my day doing this and have got nowhere, so I give up. Good on the woman on the phone who didn't stop. As far as I'm concerned, she got away with it

You do know how this sounds to us right! You give up , so she gets away with it! Now that's the truth don't convince yourself otherwise.


That outlook on this situation by the OP is a crying shame.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Deanston wrote: »

None of that is true, they have six months do deal with it.

No NIP is needed for a mobile phone offence and even if there was there’s been an accident.

You’ve just made it up or posted in ignorance.

He's not on about any of what you just said.


When dashcam footage is submitted to police it is subject to scrutiny (evidentiary test)BEFORE any action taken in relation to it. That standard is met by the CPS guidance or higher set by the unit taking in Dashcam Footage (not having this risks flooding the prosecutor and CPS with thousands of cases and risk overloading the CPS and courts so police are the "pre Filter")
The Evidential Stage

4.6 Prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect on each charge*. They must consider what the defence case may be, and how it is likely to affect the prospects of conviction. A case which does not pass the evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be


So if the woman was on her phone, but the footage isn't clear or there isn't any footage of her on her phone as it was out of frame there is no evidence of any offence therefore no action it become word against word and police will not submit what can easily be challenged and won in magistrates.

Deanston

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

He's not on about any of what you just said.


When dashcam footage is submitted to police it is subject to scrutiny (evidentiary test)BEFORE any action taken in relation to it. That standard is met by the CPS guidance or higher set by the unit taking in Dashcam Footage (not having risks flooding the prosecutor with thousands of cases and risk overloading the courts)
The Evidential Stage

4.6 Prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect on each charge*. They must consider what the defence case may be, and how it is likely to affect the prospects of conviction. A case which does not pass the evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be


So if the woman was on her phone, but the footage isn't clear or there isn't any footage of her on her phone as it was out of frame there is no evidence of any offence therefore no action it become word against word and police will not submit what can easily be challenged and won in magistrates.

What about careless driving and failing to stop?

It’s amazing you know exactly what he meant.

Deanston

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

So! why is it so hard to attend a police station?
Why is it so hard to call your local police station?


Its not good on the woman on the phone who didn't stop, its shame on the person who has the evidence but could only be bothered so much as to give up after an email and e-form failure. You're going to let them get away with it if that is the only effort you wish to put into it.
Plenty of advice on here saying attend a station, why is it you wish not to follow what you have asked?


Do you want to help or not?


They're site is having technical difficulties right now, so jump in car with footage on disc got to local station hand it in.


You do know how this sounds to us right! You give up , so she gets away with it! Now that's the truth don't convince yourself otherwise.


That outlook on this situation by the OP is a crying shame.

If the police make it too hard no wonder the public give up.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

Deanston wrote: »

What about careless driving and failing to stop?

It’s amazing you know exactly what he meant.

The incident and fail to stop was never in question from the start.


Op mentioned mobile phone and this is what was being addressed by casseus, as for the purposes of the evidential stage, I know the evidential exists, so read it as that.


You focused on nit picking and left out 90% of casseus's post in ignorance and you chose to focus on this:

and there's the usual 14 days from the date offence to issue any kind of letter to the registered keeper

Which is technically right, police aim to write to RK's to start the proceedings to prosecute offences within 14 days of an offence, but have 6 months in which to bring a prosecution.


Please read beyond on what you wish to nit pick at Andy.

Comms69

just ring 101 and talk to a human.