Red Light Infringement Issued by Highway Patrol (Vic)

Lgoogdi on 19/11/2016 - 18:29
Last edited 20/11/2016 - 11:57 by 2 other users

Hello All,

Last week, highway patrol car stopped me while I was coming back from work and advised that I've jumped the red light on the right turn just before and here is my case:

  1. I think i crossed the light while it was orange and I'm positive that there is no camera or evidence other than the word of highway patrol
  2. It is 70 kmh highway and don't believe that it was safe to stop
  3. I'm a responsible citizen and don't have any traffic infringement in last 5 years, may be not even parking fine
  4. Infringement are Red Traffic arrow, Failed to stop at Line and penalty is $389 with 3 demerit points

Questions I've from the community are:

  1. Do I have an option for internal review as I can't see internal review option on infringement notice. Only request to appear at court.
  2. What are my chances of successful review as it is my word against the highway patrol. The only thing in my favour is that I don't have any traffic infringement in last 5 years.
  3. Should I go for internal review or go with the appear in court option or go with one after another
  4. If going to court then should I hire a lawyer or go by myself
  5. Any negative impacts of going to court
  6. Lastly, any recommendation of good lawyer

Thanks in anticipation for your suggestion and advise.

Automotive

Related Stores

VicRoads
VicRoads

Comments

  • mskeggs on 19/11/2016 - 18:48
    +13

    The only possibility you have of winning a court date with the evidence you have presented is if the police don't turn up. This happens occasionally.
    You will pay a much larger penalty including costs if you go to court.
    I would definitely pay if I was booked in these circumstances.

    • random110 on 20/11/2016 - 10:21

      Do courts award costs against the defendant in criminal matters??

      I'm fairly sure they do not.

      Edit: Just saw your other responses below.

      • tonsta on 22/11/2016 - 00:26
        +1

        It's up to the courts to award cost IF cost are requested.

        Being a simple civil matter against the state and you don't have anything to present other than your driving record it shouldn't be too much in cost if it went against you.

        But your probably going to loss if it gets to a hearing. I would pay it if the internal review goes against you than deuce it out in court.

        Unless your time is worth nothing and you have nothing better to do that is.

        • humdogg on 23/11/2016 - 16:51

          Tonsta is right. The costs are not "much larger" in Vic and depend on how far you go. If you go all the way to a contested hearing and you are found guilty, the costs will not be overly severe because of the relatively low complexity of your case. If you are time poor or money poor, don't contest.

    • MasterScythe on 22/11/2016 - 17:10
      +1

      WOW, Victoria sounds HARSH!
      I'm in QLD, and basically, if you show up, and you're not a drop kick (which is pretty easy to tell) you get off.

      While cops can issue notices, the courts still have to abide by "innocent until proven guilty" and they have 0 evidence if the driver wasn't photographed.

      And while its possible to have court costs charged, I've heard of many a threat, but 0 follow through for traffic.
      This coming from the knowledge of a VERY large car group, and a good friend who's a stenographer.

  • googdi on 19/11/2016 - 18:55

    I was of the understanding that if the court decision doesn't go my way, in most cases i'll be paying the penalty in the infringement notice. Is my understanding incorrect?
    Also, is there an additional fee if i proceed with court proceedings?

    • mskeggs on 19/11/2016 - 19:03
      +2

      In NSW it is usual to have costs awarded against you if you are found guilty, so,it costs more. I don't know about VIC.
      The info sheet I just looked up quoted less than 1% of NSW fines are reversed in court, which is consistent with my anecdotal experience.
      To win you pretty much need video evidence showing you are innocent and witnesses to swear I'm your favour!

    • BestofOZB on 20/11/2016 - 08:05
      +17

      You will also pay court fee and the other party's legal fee. I Paid $1,700 in QLD when I took the local council to court over a $120 parking ticket and lost.

      If there is no evidence the judge will almost always take the police word over yours, so my advice is pay and move on.

      • Dhandoftime on 20/11/2016 - 17:29
        +3

        No chance to win in QLD man as the government here is in hunger of money.

  • driver33b on 19/11/2016 - 19:07
    +24

    A yellow (amber) traffic light or arrow means stop. A driver approaching traffic lights showing a yellow traffic light must stop if the driver can stop safely before reaching the stop line or traffic lights. Penalties apply for drivers who fail to stop at a yellow light, unless it is unsafe to do so.

    "Top 10 of the Most misunderstood traffic rules.PDF"….is a PDF worth downloading and reading.

    • akd on 21/11/2016 - 13:03
      +3

      Thanks, It was worth reading to refresh understanding of rules.Link to pdf

      • chonkie on 22/11/2016 - 21:09

        Is there a similar PDF for Victoria?

  • googdi on 19/11/2016 - 19:11
    -7

    I understand that however it is 70 kmph zone and i believed that i was not safe to break really hard..
    I'm thinking than without any video evidence and and with my very good history how much chance do i stand.
    And i'm not really concerned about the demerit points, only consideration is the penalty cost

    • Settero on 19/11/2016 - 19:34
      +22
      • a police officer is saying it was safe to stop
      • police officers word is authoritative in the matter, your opinion will lose to their professional judgment in court.
      • your driving history should be irrelevant if it goes to court
      • you can not apply for a internal appeal as it was processed by a person whom you could have appealed to on the spot.
      • in most cases the penalty given is a on the spot fine , if it goes to court you can be charged with the maximum + fees.

      in no way am i saying that what you are saying cant be right , what im saying is a judge would look at this case , think you are wasting their time and use you as a example by giving you the highest fees they can

    • apple2016 on 19/11/2016 - 20:32
      +14

      I understand that however it is 70 kmph zone and i believed that i was not safe to break really hard..

      The amber (yellow) lights stay for 4.5 secs in a 70k zone. That's a lot of time to stop if you are paying attention to the lights and travelling under the posted speed limit. Atleast that what the Judge is going to inform you if you take this to court.

      • twocsies on 19/11/2016 - 21:11
        +7

        Actually he was turning right so it would be yellow for 3.0 seconds. I guess the motivation is that the slower cornering speed should make it much easier to stop.

      • cheapisgood on 20/11/2016 - 01:03
        +3

        That's only for going straight. For right turn arrows in Victoria, most are set to 3 seconds amber only because the designed turning speed is less then 45km/h for most intersections. Pretty bs in my opinion but oh well.

      • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 20:19

        Given that you are correct what if it was only yellow for 1 second or half a second before he went through it?

  • [Deactivated] on 19/11/2016 - 20:55
    -5

    This is why dashcams should be compulsory for all vehicles as in some other countries. Although dashcam footage isn't considered to be professional evidence in a court of law, you can certainly present this as evidence to support your case in a situation like this.

    You can certainly ask for an internal review but you'll need evidence which sufficiently excuses the alleged offence. Emergencies could be one such excuse, if you have evidence of that emergency. Check the website of the infringement issuing agency for advice on what is considered to be a reasonable excuse.

    • Euphemistic on 19/11/2016 - 21:27
      +1

      This is not why dash cams should be compulsory. Perhaps this is why dash cams are recommended, but making them mandatory so that you can disprove a police officer sounds laughable. I'd imagine we'll be getting mandatory black box data recorders before dash cams, a spd as cam doesn't tell the full story, like speed, brake application and a whole lot of other stuff that a data recorder would.

      • [Deactivated] on 19/11/2016 - 21:54

        There are cases where drivers have been fined in very close amber/red light incidents for crossing a red light. Dashcams might not always be used to disprove the police, but it may at least stop police officers from issuing fines in such close circumstances knowing that the driver may have something to use in their defence.

        Not that it happens, but if the police pulled you over after a green light and claimed that you crossed a red light, there's absolutely nothing you could do without evidence to exonerate yourself. Similarly, where a light is about to change to red and the light sequence at the time of entering the intersection is somewhat ambiguous, police can (and probably) would issue you an infringement for running a red.

        Police know that the majority of drivers do not have a dashcam, and to think that they wouldn't use this fact to their advantage is probably turning a blind eye.

        • Euphemistic on 20/11/2016 - 08:29
          +1

          I fully agree that having a dashcam is a wise thing to do, but calling for it to be compulsory for the reason you said doesn't make sense. I've been driving for over 20 years, and while it might have been fun to upload some stuff to YouTube for a laugh it would not have made any difference otherwise, and I have received a fine or two in my time.

  • TheMatrix on 19/11/2016 - 21:03
    +2

    Red traffic light infringement is very hard to fight (I did try). Your good driving record make no different… the police might have a dash cam on his car as well…. If you value your time , just pay and move on.

    • compingqueen on 21/11/2016 - 16:49

      Well actually, police do have a camera that's constantly recording. It's activated once they put the siren on. When that happens, it back tracks a bit so that the infringement is caught and they have their evidence. I learnt that 10 years ago in jury duty.

      • Finde on 22/11/2016 - 00:58

        Not all police. Only country highway patrol cars have that.

        • compingqueen on 22/11/2016 - 08:45

          Downvoted, really? For stating a fact?

          When you say country do you mean that as rural? Because I also learnt this tip from a cop friend who works in the city (they are highway patrol so perhaps it's just highway patrol cars though this was 10 years ago).

        • Finde on 23/11/2016 - 09:32

          @compingqueen:

          I didn't down vote you.

          I just spoke to a friend in a metro highway patrol unit and he said their office has them but I know of others that don't.

          All rural highway patrol cars have them mainly to record pursuits but they can be used for anything.

  • twocsies on 19/11/2016 - 21:07
    +10

    In my opinion, you don't have much chance unless you can show that the yellow phase timing of that specific light is wrong.

    From http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Driver-guide/Speeding/Stopp…

    Speed Reaction distance Braking distance Total stopping distance
    40km/h 17m 9m 26m
    50km/h 21m 14m 35m
    60km/h 25m 20m 45m
    70km/h 29m 27m 56m

    So going by what you said, at a straight intersection, you would need to show that the yellow light came on when you were less than 56 metres from the intersection. Let's assume a 24 metre wide intersection.

    Travelling at 70 km/h, how long to travel 80 m?

    80 m * (1 h / 70 km) * (1 km / 1000 m) * (3600 seconds / hour) = 4.11 seconds

    Generally yellow lights are timed for 4.5 seconds. They have designed the light timing such that you should never be in the intersection when it's red unless you incorrectly determined that there was not a safe stopping distance.

    Now, I would say it's not possible to make the right turn at 70 km/h. Let's say you would need to slow down to 40 kmh. It really complicates the math because the velocities are not fixed, but it does mean you have to make the decision to stop within about 30 metres or less from the light. I'm assuming that there's a dedicated lane for turning.

    Note that the yellow light are sometimes incorrectly timed. http://cameracommissioner.vic.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2013…
    If you could show that that yellow light was incorrectly timed, you would have a much stronger case. They do try to make lights fair because they don't want to give people ways to get out of tickets. The report gives some more details such as turn lights for all left/right turns is 3.0 seconds, which should be adequate for crossing the stop line before the yellow signal disappears.

    • ninjataki on 21/11/2016 - 22:02
      +2

      He should go and video the lights timing intervals on the off chance it's dodgy perhaps. Get outta jail card..

  • Euphemistic on 19/11/2016 - 21:30
    +2

    Suck I t up, unless you can get some video evidence a police officer is not going to change his mind. What he saw, is what he saw. You might have been concentrating on something else and not seen the light change exactly when it did. I know I've been guilty of crossing on a 'late yellow' a few times when I've looked up from the dash/radio/rear view mirror and seen an orange but not known how long it was yellow for.

  • StewBalls on 19/11/2016 - 21:36
    +6

    Write to them very, very politely asking for an official caution.

    Be very conciliatory, admit to the offence but state clearly that it was not intentional, merely a momentary lapse/misjudgment of the light/distance situation, something plausible whilst still taking ownership…and most certainly say that it's not something that you do regularly…even offer to pay the infringement if they mitigate the demerit penalty…that's the best chance you've got for any kind of win here IME.

    If you get a result, savour it…if not, it would most certainly be in your best interest (as others have noted) to cop it on the chin.

    • greatlamp on 20/11/2016 - 10:13
      -4

      He would have to admit fault, and it would be used against him in court.

      If you really believe you have a case, go to court, but do not ask for an internal review - you are just making it easier for them to prepare a case against you.

      With the facts you have described, I don't see any reason why the word of the highway patrol won't be taken as is, in my opinion you have no chance

      • StewBalls on 20/11/2016 - 16:37
        +7

        He's not going to court dopey, these are on the spot fines, it's already been issued…hence the request for official caution, and I said nothing about electing to have the matter heard at court.

        Honestly, some of you guys with mediocre comprehension skills pretending to be legal-eagles are just embarrassing yourselves…

        • greatlamp on 20/11/2016 - 19:21
          +2

          Perhaps I didn’t explain correctly, assuming he has a good case to take to court, he should not ask for an internal review

    • DWH on 21/11/2016 - 11:45
      +3

      My understanding is they never allow warnings/cautions for red lights. Speeding fines, yes.

  • Olokun on 19/11/2016 - 21:42
    +12
    1. There are no internal reviews for red light infringements in VIC
    2. Zero chance. NSW requires 10 years clear record as a benchmark
    3. See point 1. Only go to court if your licence is at risk.
    4. Lawyer up only if point 3 applies and you can not afford to lose it.
    5. Time and money
    6. Sean Hardy
  • aoeueoa on 19/11/2016 - 21:51
    -6

    If you can't safely stop at any orange light, you're a bad driver or your car needs the brakes checked.

    • [Deactivated] on 19/11/2016 - 22:00
      +2

      Provided that you have sufficient distance to stop. Going at 70 when the lights 3 metres in front of you turn amber, you'll have immense difficulty stopping in time.

      • Olokun on 19/11/2016 - 22:04

        If you are doing 70km/h turning a corner you shouldn't be on the road.

        • [Deactivated] on 19/11/2016 - 22:19
          +1

          I never said turning a road, I was just replying to aoeueoa's comment which specifies "any orange light".

    • bobbified on 19/11/2016 - 23:30
      +4

      If you can't safely stop at any orange light, you're a bad driver

      Are you saying you've stopped at every orange light?

      If that was possible, it'll defeat the purpose of having that orange light in the first place.

    • Lockieasy on 21/11/2016 - 14:15
      +1

      Stopping suddenly at an amber light can be dangerous. Just look at dashcam footage posted on youtube where a driver has stopped suddenly on an amber light and the following cars/trucks piled into them.

      e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3pvrpKDjRQ

  • googdi on 19/11/2016 - 23:39
    +1

    I'm little confused if i've the internal review option or not. Victorian fine website suggests that Internal reviews are not available for:
    1. excessive speeding
    2. drink-driving offences
    3. drug-driving offences
    4. alcohol-related boating offences
    As per above it should be eligible for internal review, am i missing anything here?
    Link below:
    http://online.fines.vic.gov.au/fines/Content.aspx?page=37&s=…

  • woteva on 20/11/2016 - 08:58
    +7

    Just nimble it and move on…..

  • Randxyz123 on 20/11/2016 - 09:00
    +3

    This is why a dash cam is useful.

    You can write in for a official review. It is not given as a option because then everyone would know and they wouldn't make any money. However I wouldn't go to court. You're gonna have to take a day off work, and explain to the judge why you think you are right and the police is wrong. If you loose you'll have to pay costs and it'll cost you a lot more. A lawyer won't be cheap.

    If I were you I'd curse, pay the fine and move on. I think giving someone a fine for going through a orange light when turning right is pathetic as you often have to do that. But the law is the law and sometimes these things are worth fussing about…

    One thing though…

    Did you go through a red LIGHT or a red right turn ARROW?

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 11:21

      If you have a dashcam and can use the video from it, you'd be able to defend yourself if you knew how to carry yourself in court. Save a lot of $$$ on lawyers.

  • Gershom on 20/11/2016 - 09:48

    I think i crossed the light while it was orange

    And the cop will swear under oath that you went through on red. I'm quite sure the magistrate will believe you, not him. So sure, take it to court, no worries. Probably the cop will break down and confess.

    How old are you?

  • Slippery Fish on 20/11/2016 - 09:52
    -7

    Cop the fine, Orange is to be treated as red.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 11:19
      +1

      If the amber light was to be treated the same as a red light, could you please remind me why we have an amber light in the first place?

      • Slippery Fish on 20/11/2016 - 15:24

        It's stop if safe to do so. It is the flexible version of stop, and if you didn't but the cop thought it was safe for you to do so he will fine you.

        • John Dough on 20/11/2016 - 18:55
          +2

          Orange are not to be treated as red at all.
          Stop on the amber if you can safely, stop on the red always without exception - straight from the rule book.

          The problem with amber lights is that it's a judgement call and half the drivers I see out there aren't able to judge what to have for lunch.

        • Slippery Fish on 20/11/2016 - 22:37
          -3

          @greydaniel: so… Exactly what I said, Why did you even post that.

        • ctg on 20/11/2016 - 23:11
          +4

          @Slippery Fish: Because you said this only hours earlier… "Cop the fine, Orange is to be treated as red.".

    • Bigsta on 20/11/2016 - 20:35
      +4

      IN NSW police can book you for going through orange too, they changed the law a few years ago to close the option of people saying it was orange. In NSW we have red light speed cameras, they are the most dangerous thing on the road, i always see acidents where these are installed.

      I went through one and got done for 54 in a 50 zone, how is that dangerous?? so then when going through these intersections i began staring at my speedo to make sure i was not over and almost got in a accident and ended up going through a red light 0.8s after it whet red because of my distraction staring at the speedo and some idiot cutting me off.

      People should not be speeding excessively or going through red lights but the draconian enforcement of these laws are just plain unsafe.

  • smpantsonfire on 20/11/2016 - 10:35
    +1

    Imo all you have to do is create reasonable doubt about the cops ability to correctly assess whether you ran a red light or not.

    Maths, physics and attention to details would get you off of this one easy if you went to court.

    • Hengis on 20/11/2016 - 21:28
      +6

      I don't often reply but I have a bit of experience. Agree with this. I was in a similar situation where it was my word against theirs. If you go to Court in Vic, the officer must also submit to you prior to the court date a document which outlines their statement of events that occurred. This document is prone to error, due to clerical laziness or sometimes impossible statements copy and pasted from their previous "successful" cases. Read this carefully, and assess the feasibility of their statement and poke holes in it. It must be proven beyond reasonable doubt you committed the offence. Focus on the events rather than admin errors. e.g. stoppage time and reaction time as opposed to he got my name or date of birth wrong. Even in court, if you do go ahead, just present yourself, dress nicely, speak reasonably and in a logical way and just smile and nod at the police prosecutor - he does this 1000 times a day, and may even offer you a deal (like he did me which I stupidly took) prior to the judge sitting. The police prosecutor can amend their statement or the charges at anytime by notifying the judge after the court proceedings commence. If worse comes to worst, Even if you are found guilty, other factors are taken into consideration including your driving history (YES ABSOLUTELY), your job, your financial situation, the Judge will want to know who you are and what you do, where you are going that day and it would also be helpful to bring in a letter of reference from someone notable in your community or someone in a respectable role or job (i.e. a Doctor, Pharmacist,someone who knows you well and can vouch that you are an honest and good person) to support your case. REMEMBER The Judge does not want to put hardship on you, he just wants to make sure you have learnt your lesson if you are guilty. I believe the court fees if you lose are very minimal (if any… I didn't pay anything), and he also has the authority to waive all the fees associated with the fine and make you do something like a safe driving class which cost alot less ($99 at sandown) rather than pay a fee. At the end of the day if you believe you have done nothing wrong, go through the process, and explain your case to the judge in a fair and reasonable manner. You will not be slapped down with huge fines or anything for presenting your case. Don't get stressed about it, there really is nothing to worry about (yes it is nerve racking), but this is a new process for anybody so don't get stressed, and if you think you have a valid case, do not negotiate with the police prosecutor or accept his offer =)

      • John Dough on 21/11/2016 - 08:19
        +1

        This (with a day off work) vs $389. It's what it really comes down to.
        The above is good advice if you want to fight it, but from my limited experience with this sort of thing the defendants don't usually end up winning.
        Definitive proof like a front and rear dashcam or another car dashcam, and and independent witness would help your cause.

        Just depends on your principals and what your time is worth to you. If in fact the cop made the wrong call, it would be just to have it overturned, and may make them think twice about dishing out tickets for borderline crap like this and concentrate on the real issues out there on the road like drink driving and un-roadworthy/un-registered vehicles.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 11:16
    +9

    I am 71 and been driving for 54 years. I may have driven more than most on here over the those 51 sears. I have done over 300,000Ks in the vehicle I purchased in 2007. Earlier this year I was caught by a red light camera bang in the middle of an intersection.

    I wrote to Infringement Bureau requesting a review as it had been 9 years since I had an infringement and pointing out the distance I had driven. It was refused.

    I thought screw this and opted to go to court. When my name was called I stood in front of the Magistrate waiting for to speak to me. I stood for 3 or 4 minutes while she was reading papers. It was my 2 page letter that the Infringement Bureau had knocked back.

    When she finished reading she looked up at me smiling saying 'You have a pretty good record for 51 years and the distance you travel. I find the offence proven with no conviction recorded.' I said two words in the Court…thank you. Made my year.

    The above was at Burwood Court, Sydney.

    • CVonC on 20/11/2016 - 11:41

      was caught by a red light camera bang in the middle of an intersection

      so you were already past the white lines waiting to turn or were you still on the white lines waiting to turn? i'm guessing the latter as that's the only way to trigger the camera.

      I find the offence proven with no conviction recorded

      slightly confused @ "the offence proven". so you were guilty but they let you off cos of your driving record?

      • Wraith on 22/11/2016 - 14:37

        Yes, that's a thing. Section 76 of the sentencing act: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/sa1991121/…

        In english:
        "Yes you did it, the police were right to pull you over. But under the circumstances in front of me, I'm going to dismiss the charge."

        Since you were guilty of the offence, you'll still accrue demerit points. But, you won't have to pay the fine.

        Note: It's risky to hang your defence on a Section 76. The prosecutor has no power to make that happen, it's entirely up to the magistrate. The best you can get from the police is an assurance that they won't contest a section 76. But if the magistrate decides there isn't good enough reason, he/she won't permit it and you'll be back at court another day at best. Paying lots of money at worst.

    • greatlamp on 20/11/2016 - 19:23
      +1

      Did you still have to pay the fine?

      • F1Maniac on 20/11/2016 - 20:02
        +1

        Didn't get thAt part either

    • Peace Maker on 21/11/2016 - 23:00
      +1

      I find the offence proven with no conviction recorded.

      So were found guilty and you received no further penalty. I'm not sure that's a win, but as long as you are happy with that outcome.

      • Agret on 22/11/2016 - 19:16
        +1

        I think in this case maybe at his age he didn't have the reaction time needed to react safely to the light change. Self driving cars will be amazing when they finally hit the public roads :)

    • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2016 - 16:25
      +1

      You're a hectic lad

  • EmCKay on 20/11/2016 - 11:40
    -6

    Please just learn from your mistake (yes, it's your mistake) and pay up. The amount of people who clog up the courts for this petty crap is insane.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 12:05
    +1

    CVonC. I was going straight through the intersection not turning left or right.

    I didn't plead not guilty. I pleaded guilty with an explanation as in the letter to the Infringement Bureau. That being I was checking my mirror for a truck that was bearing up on me. The particular rd being Parramatta rd is like a six lane stock car race.

    Magistrates in NSW at least, have the authority to find you guilty without a conviction being recorded.They also have something called a Section 10 Dismissal they can use for first offenders with traffic matters. My guess is it was because of my driving record. Mind you I was thinking 'I am gone here' as the 20 or so before me were all found guilty and had their fines or licence suspensions increased.

    fiza1981. If you feel you have a case you should take it to court.

    • JediJan on 20/11/2016 - 13:40

      I was waiting on a stop sign to make a right turn onto City Road (South Melb) once. Unsafe to proceed and had trucks left and right … vehicle came speeding up from behind, squealing brakes etc. and ran into rear of mine. Driver advised he had experienced brake failure .. it was leaking brake fluid by then! I was asked by my manager at work if I could have avoided the accident!?

      Anyways, turned out that other driver was a barrister, didnt want to go through insurance, and was the slowest to pay up (3 quotes) after several calls, but finally a boyfriend seemed to have the charm to speed payment up.

  • JediJan on 20/11/2016 - 13:27

    My vehicle was stopped in the middle of an intersection whilst in process of turning right (Qld), giving way to oncoming traffic. Ignorant driver decided to acceletate and plough through as amber light turned to red instead of stopping so i was forced to wait. Photo was taken … (I was already on the road from a green light, had to wait for amber … then red for that idiot, to complete the turn) I paid the fine, as technically I was in the wrong and much depends on the judge. In my case I would have had to pay for the photo evidence and more than likely the court costs. It was that or proceed through the turn and probably have an accident (my complete fault of course). Ps. If my vehicle had remained stationery in the middle of that intersection it would have been causing an obstruction, so i continued after that other car had passed. That was over 20 years ago … still not happy … I was booked for "running a red light"

    My suggestion is just to pay up; Law will say if you were travelling at under the recommended speed limit, then you had ample time to stop, and you would more than likely have additional costs (and time taken in Court) awarded against you just to argue your point.

    So, don't harass any driver for waiting behind the line or not proceeding through on an amber. Technically they are correct in doing so … no matter how annoying it may be for you.

    To be a bit ambigious hook turns in Victoria basically tell you to wait on left hand side of road until amber light to complete your turn. If you are lucky a Police officer directs you to continue. Interstate drivers tend to not like these turns, but they do work, an DC i prefer these. Just a matter for a little research on the intersections involved (applicable timd frames) and heeding traffic signs.

    • smpantsonfire on 20/11/2016 - 15:04
      +2

      They need two photos now for red light camera. One behind the line on the red and one past the line on the red.

      Today you would have gotten off just for asking to see both photos.

      • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 15:32
        +1

        Here's another hot tip.

        For red light offences these days, the offence is only proven when there are photographs taken from behind.

        Reason being, photos taken from the front of the vehicle would not adequately prove that the lights facing the driver were red, even if all lights along one stretch of the road were timed to be the same.

        • JediJan on 20/11/2016 - 20:09

          Yes; my vehicle was stationary in the centre of the road on green, amber then red. The cameras only functioned when my car was moving off on the red as the other car sped past. I did think at the time that the photo would perhaps have captured the other vehicle, not mine; perhaps both. The photo would have cost me something like $40, the fine $100 in those days. I didnt feel that photo would have helped my situation at all. I was tempted but didnt want to risk paying more.

      • bigticket on 22/11/2016 - 01:41

        I think you will find in a lot of cases the issue is that a most drivers waiting to turn right will wait behind the 'line' on green/amber and will take the turn after the the lights change to red, effectively going through a 'red'.

        I see drivers taking this approach all the time in NSW. They are basically unaware the the correct procedure is to enter the intersection fully and then take the turn. Therefore the camera will not be triggered in the first place, that is, there will be no way the first photo of entering the intersection on 'red' will exist.

        • smpantsonfire on 22/11/2016 - 11:03

          I don't think there would be a red light camera in an intersection like that, as those intersections are the 'turn right when safe' on a green straight light, with the right turn arrows not lit up.

          If you had a green right arrow, you would not have to wait to turn. So if you are waiting in the intersection, then it's a green straight, and no right lights lit up

        • bigticket on 22/11/2016 - 11:36

          @smpantsonfire: "I don't think there would be a red light camera in an intersection like that, as those intersections are the 'turn right when safe' on a green straight light, with the right turn arrows not lit up."

          I was referring generally to cases where the vehicle turning right has to wait for oncoming traffic to complete going through the intersection before taking the turn as the lights are turning red.

          If the vehicle is waiting and has not completed passing the white line then that triggers the camera sequence of 2 flashes. By entering the intersection completely, that is, passing the white line you avoid the red light camera been triggered.

        • smpantsonfire on 22/11/2016 - 12:12

          @bigticket:

          I know what you are saying, and I'm saying there shouldn't/wouldn't be a camera in an intersection that has that scenario.

          There should only be cameras in intersections that have a designated right turn arrows where you ONLY can go on a green arrow, and no other light.

          I think I am wrong, but my logic makes sense. Lol

    • bargaino on 22/11/2016 - 13:13
      +1

      I was already on the road from a green light, had to wait for amber … then red for that idiot, to complete the turn) I paid the fine, as technically I was in the wrong

      I don't see how you did anything wrong. Its quite common to do that. But if you were fully into the middle of the intersection on green, I don't see how you triggered the camera. Is it possible that another car passing your left triggered the camera?

      https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/road/traffic-l…

      If you’re in the intersection and the oncoming traffic continues until the lights turn yellow or red, you must complete the turn on the yellow or red light.

      • JediJan on 25/11/2016 - 23:50

        Was over twenty years ago in Cairns. I think the car running the red triggered the camera as he really did run the red. It was not busy traffic or anything with no one behind me wanting to turn so no witnesses or anything. I am guessing the other driver he sped up really just to try and make the amber. Flash was on my left and i would hazard a guess that his car may have even been hidden by mine (no idea though) … which was still stationary waiting for him to pass. I was thinking along the lines on how i could prove i did nothing wrong and figured no chance. I just put it down to bad luck and paid up. If the Police were there then i dont think they would have issued me with an infringement notice.

  • Joney on 20/11/2016 - 14:52

    Respect the law, you may have to rely on the help of the police one day. The police do not go out of their way to fine people, if they find you guilty of an offence, take responsibility and move on. It's easy to say "throw the book at them" but then cry innocent when you yourself get caught?

    • bobbified on 23/11/2016 - 09:54

      The police do not go out of their way to fine people

      I'm not so sure about this….

  • Gronk on 20/11/2016 - 14:59
    +8

    I'm not going to launch into a personal attack or anything like that, but straight out the gate it sounds like you're having some trouble dealing with the fact that you've been told you did something wrong. I doubt any of us are perfect drivers so sooner or later it's going to happen.

    Contrary to popular belief, Highway Patrol officers aren't out there simply to fine you and take all your hard earned cash, they have a genuine vested interest in the safety of you and the people around you.

    If indeed, on this 70km/h highway it wasn't safe to stop at the amber light, then from my perspective there are only 2 reasons why this could be the case:

    1. You were speeding
    2. You weren't paying attention and only realized it was an amber light at the last minute

    Just pay the fine, get on with your life and next time don't race the amber.

    • F1Maniac on 20/11/2016 - 20:07
      +1

      They surely do have quotas though

      • ctg on 20/11/2016 - 23:50
        +1

        They indeed do, at least in NSW. I honestly believe that police are indeed that, police, and should be primarily targeting things like organised crime and douchebags who roam the hoods looking for trouble. In my mind there is a large difference between Police officers and some Highway Patrol.

        Highhway patrol can either be perfect in their job execution, saving lives, or outright douchebags fleecing the population. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen their officers breaking the law in an effort to potentially catch citizens breaking the law… (and no, not being covered by the exclusions under NSW Road Rules). Seeing a Highway Patrol stationary in a turn lane while using a lidar is frustrating.

        I've called the local police station in some instances of blatant law-breaking by these officers; their reactions when presented by facts straight from the rulebook…

        As far as the OP goes though, sounds like you ran a red which not subject to internal review. I'd pay it and move on.

  • Hirolol on 20/11/2016 - 16:03
    -1

    No chance for a review.
    Just pay the fine.
    They will take the police word over yours in court.
    Don't forget they need to make quota and the judge is on their side.

    You cannot win
    You cannot break even
    You will always lose

  • Cheapo333 on 20/11/2016 - 17:18
    +1

    Another reason to have a dashcam for things like this. ozbargain has some good deals for dashcams.

  • andyken on 20/11/2016 - 19:32

    when you take your case on court, remember, you do not need to proof you are wrong, but the police need to proof that you are wrong, so the cops need the photo taken from the back of your vehicle to fined you. otherwise you are innocent until proved guilty.

    • euk on 20/11/2016 - 19:51

      Actually not true. Highway don't actually need to prove anything. A reasonable suspicion of speeding or visual from the cop for an infringement is already enough to book you.

      It's the same reason why highway patrol can book you for speeding without actually clocking you on radar.

      Crap I know, but that's the way things are being run at the moment.

      • andyken on 21/11/2016 - 18:04

        well, i cant tell much but on my experience, i elect went to court but after that i never received anything from the court after 3 years. Before i elect to court, i ask my friend husband who is cop, he told me that I no need to proof anything in court but the cop will

        • Euphemistic on 21/11/2016 - 21:38

          And some of the time all the proof a cop needs is 'I saw you'.

        • andyken on 21/11/2016 - 22:34

          @Euphemistic: not in 2016 going to 2017, probably in 1920 lol

        • Euphemistic on 22/11/2016 - 15:26

          @andyken: They do need proof for criminal offences. However, for traffic infringement notices and any other on the spot fines (eg littering, jaywalking). the whole idea of on the spot fines is to free up the court system, sure, you can fight them in court, but if it comes down to your word vs the policeman there is a fair chance that the policeman is going to be believed as correct.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 20:15

    I've got some knowledge in the field…

    It is irrelevant if you went through a red light or yellow light. The penalty's exactly the same.

    If you will argue in court that it wasn't a red light and it was a yellow light, the magistrate will downgrade from red light to yellow light and you will get the same penalty + costs.

    Magistrates can increase the penalty ten fold and they must obey by a set of penalties as mandated by the law. They can't just give you $20 fine for that.

    Also, it will be your word against two police officers.

    Oh and you were probably recorded also, some of them have cameras in the car.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 20:27

      Sorry, I failed to answer your questions. Below is my opinion:

      Questions I've from the community are:

      Do I have an option for internal review as I can't see internal review option on infringement notice. Only request to appear at court.

      You have the option, yes.

      What are my chances of successful review as it is my word against the highway patrol. The only thing in my favour is that I don't have any traffic infringement in last 5 years.

      None

      Should I go for internal review or go with the appear in court option or go with one after another

      None

      If going to court then should I hire a lawyer or go by myself

      Hire a lawyer that will cost you… $100/hour.
      This will cost you at least:

      • If you win: $300 + court costs

      • If you lose: $300 + court costs + whatever the magistrate decides

      You also have the option of legal aid.

      Any negative impacts of going to court

      Yes, the magistrate can record a conviction against you for this penalty. Or not, it's up to him/her.

      Lastly, any recommendation of good lawyer

      None from me, sorry.

      Good luck !

      • bargainisg8 on 22/11/2016 - 14:33

        Interesting read.

        On "Yes, the magistrate can record a conviction against you for this penalty. Or not, it's up to him/her", it will be a traffic offence conviction not a criminal offence conviction, if that helps.

        Bear in mind, total of aprx $150 or $170 for court fees and victim levy to apply on top even if you win.
        But if you loose, on top of loosing points chances you would pay $389 (for actual fine) + $150 (levies) + whatever magistrate decides to pay more + the loss of amount you lose from work for attending court (may take minimum of half a day). In NSW, there are LawAccess and LegalAid, govt run orgs and can point to legal advice in your localities (I think free of charge), not sure what's the deal in Vic. My 2c, I would suggest go to court only if you think your case is good to fight. Else, its a waste of time and money. Magistrates are strict on red light bookings.

    • Hengis on 20/11/2016 - 21:33

      stop scare mongering.

      They will FAIRLY use their authority to give you a fine suited to the offence that occurred, they will not increase it by 10 fold.

      actually they have the power to give you a $20 fine, eliminate all the fines, and make you do extra things like take a safety course or community service as well.

  • googdi on 20/11/2016 - 20:21

    Thank you all for your suggestions and it is appreciated.
    To answer the questions asked above, I'm 40 year old and it was a red arrow not the Red light.
    In relation to the next steps on the matter, I'm planing to request for internal review as i believe that I didn't cross the intersection after the red arrow. Also, I personally think that I'm very responsible driver, my 5 plus years of no road offence record support it.
    Given I'm new to internal review process, I would appreciate any thoughts on writing reasonable internal review letter.

    • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 20:32
      +2

      See my answer above.

      Also, Red arrow, red light it's the same thing.

      Also, I personally think that I'm very responsible driver, my 5 plus years of no road offence record support it.

      I would argue that. It means you haven't been caught in this period.

      I would say 10+ years is a good record. Have you driven in the last 5 years ? If yes how much ?

      For example, I drive about somewhere between 500 - 700 km per week, no ticket for me in the last 13 years.

    • enzioFirenze on 21/11/2016 - 08:56
      +2

      mate, red arrow is a red light as well

    • humdogg on 21/11/2016 - 10:12

      internal review: It must be written on a valid basis for review. It cannot just be "because I have been a great driver from 5 years". It sounds like your best bet is an error of law. Based on what you have said, you would need to say that it was not safe for you to stop. That is the law. [section 57 of Road Safety Rules].

      In any event, your internal review will almost certainly be rejected and your only course to get out of the infringement is to take the matter to Court.

      At Court
      Negotiation: You have a right to negotiate with the Prosecution. They will most likely not be interested in what you have to say without a lawyer. Why? Because the evidence of police against one person is generally considered strong (although not immune from error). Furthermore, the evidence of Highway Patrol is even better for the Prosecution for traffic matters. Also there is no real room for middle ground in negotiation. This is a case of either you being guilty or not guilty.

      Outcomes
      Found guilty - by plea or after contested hearing. No discretion as to demerit points so you will cop 3 points. Magistrate has discretion on fine. It is possible for Court to find you guilty and impose a lower (unlikely) or higher fine (equally unlikely). You will most likely pay the normal fine plus some costs which in your case should be about $100 or so extra.

      Not Guilty- no demerit points, no fine, no record. But to achieve this, you will need to contest the matter. Most certainly you will not be able to do this on the day of Court. in other words, at the minimum you will need to spend two days in Court. The first day, to plea and to negotiate with Prosecution and the second day (a month or so away from first one), to contest it. If you are found not guilty, you will be entitled to some costs against the Prosecution but if you have a lawyer, it is unlikely to cover all of the costs.

      Rest of your questions
      Without legal rep, you are most likely going to lose. You should speak to a lawyer to assess your chances. Naturally, a lawyer would increase your chances but it is still an uphill battle without other evidence (eg. another driver, expert evidence, passenger). A lawyer may also see a flaw in the prosecution case. If you contest your case and lose there are no meaningful legal consequences whatsoever. You have it on your driving record like everyone else who has a fine as a traffic offence. So if in 3 years time you are charged for assault, your traffic offence won't come up as a "prior offence".

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join