Tailgating cameras and how they work

[Linas.P]

Just came across this topic... I believe some are now installed on M1 (since 2020), but aboard they have been installed for at least a decade (Germany, Netherlands to name a few). That said I was not able to find the answer to seemingly simple question - how close is too close?

And I mean exactly! Because I am sure these cameras don't just decide based on HC 126 "Tailgating is where the gap between you and the vehicle in front is too small for you to be able to stop safely if the vehicle in front suddenly brakes." Because if we think about it then the rule can be literally anything - any distance where you can stop "safely" is not tailgating and any distance where you can't is, but how to define it before the accident happens... or doesn't happen. The way rule is worded basically reads - "if you crash at the back of the car in front of you then you were tailgating". 

Now sure there is some explanation for dummies and that is known as "2 seconds rule", but to begin with it isn't "2 seconds", but rather 1.5-3.5s depending on the speed you doing and then doubled on wet road and yet again doubled on icy road. Which... on motorway means 109.5m, or 219m when wet, or 438m when icy (70MPH~31.29m/s x3.5x2x2)! As you can imagine tail-gating cameras are definitely not issuing fines if cars is driving less than 109.5 meters away. Like literally nobody keeps such distance. The chevrons on M1 are ~35m apart, and keeping 2 chevron distance would make it ~2.2 seconds. Which is not in line with HC... and to be fair I don't believe tailgating cameras actually issues fines if you were to drive say 40 or 50 meters apart (that is still distance of 10 car lengths).

I am certain that tailgating cameras works on either the distance or the time, but it is quite clear that it isn't 62m and I doubt it is 2 seconds either. Not only that it means that if cars are speeding they would get the ticket for tailgating which would be incorrect and unenforceable (and that is relevant because 80% of cars on motorway are speeding). So the question is - what is exact time or distance trigger for these cameras? 

It kind of seems weird... because one would think that if police would want people to follow the rules, rather than just collect the money, then the criteria for breaking the rules would be clear... Or maybe it isn't weird - they just want the money? 

[Mr Vlad]

I've heard about these tailgating cameras but what I read just a few months ago was that their introduction was being looked into. 

Those chevrons on motorways where one is advised to keep 2 apart. They are set for 70mph. 

As for the introduction of these effing tailgating cameras I and countless others think they are nothing more than a cash cow and on how they work? I can't think how. Those cash cows are stationery so basically a driver can be doddling along and comes across slowing traffic and hey ho there's a cash cow just where he meets up with almost stationery traffic. Photo taken coz he's 2 foot behind the car in front. Now where's the justification in that? No Where.

[ALAW]

Thanks for posting this @Linas.Psomething new to me. I dont know of anyone prosecuted by this method. However i must agree with @Mr Vladgot all the makings of a cash cow.

[Illogan]

Whilst I appreciate I may well be running the risk of being perceived as supporting the principle of 'cash cows'......

(And I don't!)

If people drove safely, and within (whatever) the car ownership and driving rules in force at the time, there would be far fewer requirements for speed cameras, traffic police or tailgating cameras.

That my supposition stands no likelihood of reality, then I'm all for whatever equipment is required to improve the risk of people completing their journeys safely.

 

 

 

[PCM]

On 9/29/2022 at 11:53 AM, Linas.P said:

Just came across this topic... I believe some are now installed on M1 (since 2020)...

Do you where on the M1?  It would be interesting to look out for them.

( Hate tail-gaiting... )

[Mr Vlad]

You're not perceived as being supportive of cash cows Dave. You're right also about driving safely and within the regulations. Most do. Its a minority that sometimes don't. And an even smaller minority that do All the time.

Do you know who the worst culprits of tailgating are? HGV1 drivers. I see it every day. I've had them right up my backside (careful lol). My new 7.5 ton truck has 360° cameras (front back and a camera on each side). My truck only does 54mph. I see Class 1 trucks behind me on my camera monitor and because of that I know they're only 6 foot from me. 

Cars however I see that maybe once a week. I do close on 2k miles a week so I'm on the road quite a bit and I see a Lot.

The thing is what defines tailgating. Is there a set distance in feet and inches? Yes there's the 2 second rule which basically is bang on. But what parameters are these tailgating cameras going to work from? That's the question. 

What you see on the M1 Piers is pure volume of traffic. That in itself can cause the perception of tailgating. 

[wharfhouse]

IMHO I suspect that at best a letter is issued based on these but no fixed fine. For a prosecution to take place - even a fixed fine - there has to be an absolute offence (like speeding). The offence that can be brought is surely only careless/dangerous driving which would then need to go to court as it's open to interpretation - no absolute threshold. It would then be up to the courts to make the judgement as to whether careless/dangerous driving had taken place. 

[ColinBarber]

48 minutes ago, Mr Vlad said:

Cars however I see that maybe once a week. I do close on 2k miles a week so I'm on the road quite a bit and I see a Lot.

The thing is what defines tailgating. Is there a set distance in feet and inches? Yes there's the 2 second rule which basically is bang on. But what parameters are these tailgating cameras going to work from? That's the question. 

What you see on the M1 Piers is pure volume of traffic. That in itself can cause the perception of tailgating.

That fact they caught 10,000 in two weeks and 26,000 over 2 months in just one spot on the M1 in Northamptonshire suggests it is more frequent than you suggest. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/caught-on-camera-10000-tailgaters-spotted-in-just-two-weeks

2 hours ago, PCM said:

Do you where on the M1?  It would be interesting to look out for them.

I’m not sure they are still there as it was only a trial in 2020. I believe they were going to roll these out but COVID probably got in the way. 
 

The latest trials are cameras that can detect if you are wearing a seat belt or holding a mobile phone. 

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/drivers-warned-mobile-phone-detection-25176681#comments-wrapper
 

[Linas.P]

41 minutes ago, wharfhouse said:

IMHO I suspect that at best a letter is issued based on these but no fixed fine. For a prosecution to take place - even a fixed fine - there has to be an absolute offence (like speeding). The offence that can be brought is surely only careless/dangerous driving which would then need to go to court as it's open to interpretation - no absolute threshold. It would then be up to the courts to make the judgement as to whether careless/dangerous driving had taken place. 

That is not much of relief, dangerous driving is fine up-to £10,000, 1 year mandatory ban and up-to 2 years in prison, careless driving if I am not mistaken £1000 and 6-points.

And what worries me is that there is no actual definition of what tailgating is. 2 seconds rule is too vague to enforce and as I said at 70MPH it is huge distance... so possibilities of somebody getting into that gap and then you getting the fine are just too great. And by the way if we say that safe distance at 70MPH is 80 m I don't even have issue if somebody get's into that gap, overtakes and goes back... people literally cut into gaps just barely longer than the length of car.

So if we take practical example - let's say camera is just working of reading the number plate and time. If you passed the same spot after 1.5s you still good, after 1.4s you get the fine. I assume that is most realistic way of them working same as average speed in principle, just comparing the time of 2 different cars on same spot rather than 1 car between 2 spots. Now imagine driving in outside lane keeping the extreme 80m distance (I generally do no tailgate, but I drive somewhat closer - maybe 40-50 metres), somebody decides to overtake on the spot were camera is and get's between you and the car in front of you, overtakes and goes back. I assume one would not even think much of it... nothing happened.. but for sure that would look for camera as if you were following the car at 1s and it would send the fine! And this is not even extreme example, as cars have literally pulled in front of me maybe 5 metres in front... that isn't even rare occurrence... and then building the distance takes some times... it is not like one would suddenly brake in outside lane and stop until there is 80 metres between them and car in front. I mean yes I would let off for some time to make-up at least 20 metres, but that is still way too close to follow another car in normal circumstances.

As well I understand they may have been trialling them, but what is good in that when conditions are not know? How they expected drivers not to get caught despite not telling them how to behave. And again - I don't believe 2 second rule suffice, neither it even applies to 70MPH... so on what conditions were they issuing the "reminders"?

[Spock66]

What about when another driver pulls over in front of you into your safety gap (which happens frequently), are you then guilty of tailgating?

I think lane discipline is a much bigger problem on UK motorways, too many idiots just hogging lanes.

And I would like to see the return of more Police traffic officers rather than an over reliance on technology.

[wharfhouse]

51 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

That is not much of relief, dangerous driving is fine up-to £10,000, 1 year mandatory ban and up-to 2 years in prison, careless driving if I am not mistaken £1000 and 6-points.

And what worries me is that there is no actual definition of what tailgating is. 2 seconds rule is too vague to enforce and as I said at 70MPH it is huge distance... so possibilities of somebody getting into that gap and then you getting the fine are just too great. And by the way if we say that safe distance at 70MPH is 80 m I don't even have issue if somebody get's into that gap, overtakes and goes back... people literally cut into gaps just barely longer than the length of car.

So if we take practical example - let's say camera is just working of reading the number plate and time. If you passed the same spot after 1.5s you still good, after 1.4s you get the fine. I assume that is most realistic way of them working same as average speed in principle, just comparing the time of 2 different cars on same spot rather than 1 car between 2 spots. Now imagine driving in outside lane keeping the extreme 80m distance (I generally do no tailgate, but I drive somewhat closer - maybe 40-50 metres), somebody decides to overtake on the spot were camera is and get's between you and the car in front of you, overtakes and goes back. I assume one would not even think much of it... nothing happened.. but for sure that would look for camera as if you were following the car at 1s and it would send the fine! And this is not even extreme example, as cars have literally pulled in front of me maybe 5 metres in front... that isn't even rare occurrence... and then building the distance takes some times... it is not like one would suddenly brake in outside lane and stop until there is 80 metres between them and car in front. I mean yes I would let off for some time to make-up at least 20 metres, but that is still way too close to follow another car in normal circumstances.

As well I understand they may have been trialling them, but what is good in that when conditions are not know? How they expected drivers not to get caught despite not telling them how to behave. And again - I don't believe 2 second rule suffice, neither it even applies to 70MPH... so on what conditions were they issuing the "reminders"?

That's why there can be no automatic fine - the letters will be the same as when communities use speed devices (that can't be used for fines) and show the results to the police who then issue a letter - or cyclists with head cams (not wanting to open another debate there) - again it's usually a letter - they can however use the evidence from these (I believe) to bring a case of careless/dangerous driving but there is a much higher burden of proof then needed and it's up to a court to make the final verdict.

[wharfhouse]

15 minutes ago, Spock66 said:

What about when another driver pulls over in front of you into your safety gap (which happens frequently), are you then guilty of tailgating?

I think lane discipline is a much bigger problem on UK motorways, too many idiots just hogging lanes.

And I would like to see the return of more Police traffic officers rather than an over reliance on technology.

Exactly - if a police offer witnesses what they believe is careless or dangerous driving they can stop and report you for this and it will be an appearance in court where they have to present the burden of proof to secure a guilty verdict - there can be no fixed penalty fine as it's too subjective.

[Linas.P]

21 minutes ago, Spock66 said:

What about when another driver pulls over in front of you into your safety gap (which happens frequently), are you then guilty of tailgating?

I think lane discipline is a much bigger problem on UK motorways, too many idiots just hogging lanes.

And I would like to see the return of more Police traffic officers rather than an over reliance on technology.

Completely agree, lane discipline is the reason why 90% of tailgating happens. Tailgating is less of an issue and more of the symptom of an issue, the actual issue is lane discipline. I said that as well... the likelihood of nobody pulling in front of you when keeping 2s distance is almost non-existent, people do it all the time, and if they do it in the spot where camera is, then somehow that would become your fault! That is why I am question the idea of these cameras.

Sure there is remaining 10% who genuinely tailgate for no go reason and that then could be further divided in people who literally don't know how to drive and what safe distance even is, people not paying attention or being distracted and creeping-up on you, to aggressive drivers who are deliberately trying to push you off the road.

What media would like us to believe is that most of tailgaters are the last group "aggressive drivers", but reality is that aggressive driver will always overtake and go his/her own way if possible... nobody tailgates just for sake of tailgating... maybe it happens in road rage scenario, but it is literally like 0.0001% of cases. Most drivers, even aggressive ones, will simply overtake and disappear in distance if they have that option. So again it is not them being aggressive which causes tailgating, it is people in front of them hogging the lane for no reason that causes it, if they simply move over as they suppose to, they would automatically remove the reason for tailgating.

16 minutes ago, wharfhouse said:

Exactly - if a police offer witnesses what they believe is careless or dangerous driving they can stop and report you for this and it will be an appearance in court where they have to present the burden of proof to secure a guilty verdict - there can be no fixed penalty fine as it's too subjective.

Even when police are on the road it seems they don't care to look what is happening. I have seen countless time police cars being cut-off on roundabouts and where in area of road rage and generally poor driving and doing nothing. It is so weird for me to see it, because police in UK literally don't care about how people drive, they happy for cameras to deal with traffic and I guess they have "better things to do".  

[wharfhouse]

9 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Even when police are on the road it seems they don't care to look what is happening. I have seen countless time police cars being cut-off on roundabouts and where in area of road rage and generally poor driving and doing nothing. It is so weird for me to see it, because police in UK literally don't care about how people drive, they happy for cameras to deal with traffic and I guess they have "better things to do".  

I agree - they often won't stop someone they see doing such things unless they are the actual motorway/highway police - I think the others (normal cars) have a hard time bringing any prosecution for a variety of reasons - I have seen the motorway/highway police pull over cars/vans driving aggressively/dangerously. It's rare though - they only seem to focus on those who are an extreme danger!

[Linas.P]

2 minutes ago, wharfhouse said:

I agree - they often won't stop someone they see doing such things unless they are the actual motorway/highway police - I think the others (normal cars) have a hard time bringing any prosecution for a variety of reasons - I have seen the motorway/highway police pull over cars/vans driving aggressively/dangerously. It's rare though - they only seem to focus on those who are an extreme danger!

Yes that is correct, they are special highway police cars and they are driving around with ANPR and looking for cars without insurance, road tax etc. Most of the time they just cruise in lane 2 and just wait for somebody to be flagged by computer. They rarely stop cars for any other reason, but you right sometimes they do pull over aggressive drivers or somebody who makes mistake in front of them. It is rare, but they are the only ones who does it.

However, normal police almost never does that... even where it is obvious that they should. And to be honest, I don't think they should be prosecuting every driver which cut them off at roundabout, but it seems just sensible for them to stop the driver and check if they are not drunk, if they have all documents etc. Maybe they driving without license or something, it would be something I would expect police to do, they should be part of community. And sure if everything is ok with car and driver they may just issue verbal warning "to be careful" and maybe educate the driver saying "you can't exit the roundabout from the third lane, or you can't simply change the lane on exit from second to first, you should in your lane" etc. etc. As such it would be at very least some benefit for the community, because that one driver may be more careful next time on roundabout, or may genuinely learn something... I know it sounds ridiculous that there are people with driving licenses who can't even exit the roundabout without crashing, but that is the general horrible state of motoring in UK.

[wharfhouse]

1 minute ago, Linas.P said:

Yes that is correct, they are special highway police cars and they are driving around with ANPR and looking for cars without insurance, road tax etc. Most of the time they just cruise in lane 2 and just wait for somebody to be flagged by computer. They rarely stop cars for any other reason, but you right sometimes they do pull over aggressive drivers or somebody who makes mistake in front of them. It is rare, but they are the only ones who does it.

However, normal police almost never does that... even where it is obvious that they should. And to be honest, I don't think they should be prosecuting every driver which cut them off at roundabout, but it seems just sensible for them to stop the driver and check if they are not drunk, if they have all documents etc. Maybe they driving without license or something, it would be something I would expect police to do, they should be part of community. And sure if everything is ok with car and driver they may just issue verbal warning "to be careful" and maybe educate the driver saying "you can't exit the roundabout from the third lane, or you can't simply change the lane on exit from second to first, you should in your lane" etc. etc. As such it would be at very least some benefit for the community, because that one driver may be more careful next time on roundabout, or may genuinely learn something... I know it sounds ridiculous that there are people with driving licenses who can't even exit the roundabout without crashing, but that is the general horrible state of motoring in UK.

When I was younger - many, many years ago - I was stopped a couple of times by police cars and given a ticking off for doing something wrong - not dangerous but was wrong - but was then sent on my way with no further report or fine etc. Those times had a more profound on my thinking as to what I had done than the couple of speeding tickets I have received in the post...! 

[royoftherovers]

12 minutes ago, wharfhouse said:

When I was younger - many, many years ago - I was stopped a couple of times by police cars and given a ticking off for doing something wrong - not dangerous but was wrong - but was then sent on my way with no further report or fine etc. Those times had a more profound on my thinking as to what I had done than the couple of speeding tickets I have received in the post...! 

Me likewise. Doing 40mph exactly, on the A41 past Cammel Laird in Birkenhead with a Police car following. I was feeling rather smug until it overtook and stopped me and the Policeman exercising the flexible dispensation that he used to possess told me the speed limit was 30mph and told me to drive more carefully in future.  "Be on your way son."

I never forgot that incident.

[Linas.P]

42 minutes ago, wharfhouse said:

When I was younger - many, many years ago - I was stopped a couple of times by police cars and given a ticking off for doing something wrong - not dangerous but was wrong - but was then sent on my way with no further report or fine etc. Those times had a more profound on my thinking as to what I had done than the couple of speeding tickets I have received in the post...! 

Absolutely, speeding tickets from cameras achieves nothing... they only infuriates... because the reason why one was speeding most likely was because the "condition on the road allowed it". I have been driving in UK for 16 years and I haven't been stopped a single time, whereas abroad (at least my experience in few EU countries) one get's stop on average at least once a year. Sometimes it is just to check documents or warn about road conditions, but you feel that presence of police.

Being stopped by police, either because of mistake, or just periodically to check documents etc. has much more profound long lasting effect and instead of annoying people it actually makes them respect police even more... especially if they have been dealt with in reasonable and respectable way, which was suitable for the situation. Only human police officer can do that and no stupid camera will ever be able to be tough enough, which still being flexible and fair for the given circumstances. 

Nowadays rules pretty much exists only where the camera is and in between anything goes, there is no respect for police (because why there would be?) and there is no order on the roads. I do agree with premise - situation on the road would improve if we had more police officers on the roads and less stupid cameras.

[Mr Vlad]

Well Colin what you posted only goes to show those with cars in the south drive worse than those I see in Lancashire Yorkshire Cumbria. And just what was it those cameras saw and photographed? What parameters were they programmed with to actually photograph the event? Those are my two main points and the third that they're nothing more than cash cows to screw us motorists more than what they're doing now.

And yes back in the day when there were more police cars on the road. I remember when I had a Rover 800 Sterling and was stopped for speeding. The police car was a video car. Oh and the video? It was a huge thing on a frame in the middle of the rear seat. One thing the rozzer said to me which I'll never forget. He said "people like you shouldn't have cars like that". He was obviously jealous as I had the top spec car and he had the base model. This was around 1982 or 1983. Happy days lol.

[ColinBarber]

6 hours ago, Mr Vlad said:

the third that they're nothing more than cash cows to screw us motorists more than what they're doing now.

There is no cash cow because there is no direct law being broken and no fixed penalty in place. Maintaining distance is ‘should’ within the Highway Code, only ‘Must’ is law. As has been stated above by others, you would have to be taken to court for dangerous driving. The trial was more about increasing awareness by sending letters to offenders. 
 

As for the criteria, you aren’t going to be told that in the same way the police don’t tell you the exact speed a camera is set to trigger above the speed limit, otherwise people you abuse that fact. Obviously it will be under the recommended minimum distance as stated in the Highway Code. 
 

 

If motorists don’t drive within the law then they have no comeback if they are caught, and if you don’t like the law then complain to your MP to get the law changed rather than complain about the police applying the law. 

[Mr Vlad]

Weird reply Colin. Me thinks you're trying to tell a granny how to suck an egg.

Personally and its the same to umpteen thousands of drivers, note the terms drivers and not motorists (there's a huge difference) that these so called cameras whether they're for speed or tailgating are indeed cash cows. However there is a small percentage of them that are located correctly in accident black spots.

As for distance between vehicles constituting tailgating. There is No Set Distance in the Highway Code. About tailgating there is just one small section of 2 or 3 paragraphs. It just states the obvious. It's dangerous etc etc etc.

It seems to me you think I'm one of those who flaunt the law regularly. Absolutely Not. I drive for a living and my licence is clean. And I admit to sometimes speed but I know where and when it's ok to and I'm one of millions too.

As for it was a trial and only letters sent out. I read those letters were summons for prosecution.

Tailgating at speed is a definite no no. However it can easily be misconstrued at low speeds and that's where the problem is. 

[ColinBarber]

3 hours ago, Mr Vlad said:

And I admit to sometimes speed but I know where and when it's ok to and I'm one of millions too.

whether you want to argue that speeding is ok or not isn't the topic for this thread but I'd say it is never safe to tailgate and therefore police should put cameras up where they are going to catch the most people.

3 hours ago, Mr Vlad said:

However it can easily be misconstrued at low speeds and that's where the problem is. 

Which is why I guess they did the trial on a motorway???

[Linas.P]

On 10/7/2022 at 12:18 AM, ColinBarber said:

As for the criteria, you aren’t going to be told that in the same way the police don’t tell you the exact speed a camera is set to trigger above the speed limit, otherwise people you abuse that fact. 

I don't think you can compare it with speed limit. Not only they are clearly posed, but most of the time we know exactly what margins are, so the point about abusing it doesn't stand either.

The speed limits are very clear and you can get fine for 0.1MPH over the limit (I once got it for 2MHP). That police chooses to set cameras with some margin on top and they don't get triggered right away that is another mater (it is their internal guidance not the law). By the way they are not being nice, this is limitation of cameras they use as they have margin of error. So as far as I am aware these margins comes from meteorology standards which are used to certify the cameras. And we know what it is, because their guidance even thought not public document (sometimes it is depending on the force) can be requested on FOI (so we know that for the moment it is +2MPH+10%). But that said they can still prosecute lower if they wish. I think in my case it was average speed and perhaps different margins applies (it was 70MPH motorway where I did 52MPH on non-existent "roadworks"). 

Going by example above - speed limit is 30MPH, the margin allowed is 30+2MPH+10%, you will get fine if you do 36MPH past the speed camera. 

So my question is not "when the camera will trigger on 30MPH road?" (although that would be cool to know as well), but first of all my question is "what is the speed limit on this road?", because there is literally no clear criteria when car can be considered tailgating. 

So what is tailgating distance to begin with? Is it 109.5 meters at 70MPH? (that what HC seems to suggest), the second part we don't know but it would be cool knowing it - perhaps they are set to trigger based on say 20 meter + 0.5s which would make it so they trigger at any distance less than 36 meters at 70MPH? I am assuming police must have guidelines of when to trigger the camera and prosecution.

What I am saying comparing it to speed limit is not like for like comparison - we know speed limits, we just sometimes don't know the margins. We don't know exact criteria for what is "tailgating", and we definitely don't know the margin. Yes we do know that drivers are advised to keep at least 2 seconds gap at any speed (3.5 seconds at 70), but that is not only advised, but literally impossible to follow in practice - nobody is driving 109.5 metres apart! Even 62 meters (which would be 2 seconds) is luxury we simply don't have. The cameras can't work on such vague criteria, they must have specific rule on when they trigger.

The discussion so far suggest that most of LOC members, many of whom (if not most) are experienced motorists with 100s of years of experience in this thread alone don't know what criteria is and are dumbfounded by this idea of "tailgating cameras". This just shows how stupid is the idea in the first place, how unclear the conditions are... I thought that maybe I am missing something and maybe they announced something somewhere, or maybe it is written somewhere in HC and I just don't know. But no, it seems really that vague - "camera will trigger somewhere between 1 metre and 109.5 meters, likely somewhere around 62 meters, but nobody knows".

And I appreciate the point that they not issuing fixed fines and the court has to decide, but the camera has to decide somehow that it needs to trigger before the case goes to court. Camera does not have 3 judges siting in it and judging what was too close, it has to have some criteria, based on something that is published and drivers must follow.

Sorry for long post, but it seems this one needs law clarified before the cameras can be put on the road - so they just started it other way around. Otherwise it will be just cash cow... and I know exactly how it will work. The NIP will say - either you admit tailgating and accept £1,000 + 6 points (same as if police would have stopped you) or you disagree and it will go to court where you risk up-to £10,000 and 2 years in jail for "dangerous driving". So event thought this is not intended as fixed fine, it will work as such in practice, leveraging on the basis that majority of drivers are not legal experts and won't take their chances in the court. Especially considering the criteria isn't even clear, so it isn't even clear if the case can be defended at all. And for those few who will choose to defend it will be thought as well, because getting lawyer will likely cost close £1000 in itself. So the only way I can see unfair fines being beaten is when the lawyers themselves will get caught. Basically it means masses will be subjected to unfair fines where everything is stacked against them from beginning and majority will accept the fine, not because it was fair, but because they could not defend it. 

[toffee_pie]

Tailgaitging camera could be the end of the 'white van' 

[Mr Vlad]

If that were to happen Eric then everyone would suffer massively as they'd not get things delivered.