Free Traffic Legal Advice

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.

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.