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

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 21:26
    +3

    A Highway Patrol officer I was talking to a few years ago I mentioned my father had one parking ticket in 72 Years of driving

    The officer said my dad was lucky. I had to agree with him.

    Everyone and I mean everyone breaks a road rule every time you drive.

  • [Deactivated] on 20/11/2016 - 21:36

    A lawyer?

    No way mate.

    I have represented myself twice in 22 years. Won both times. Possibly Magistrates take a dim view of someone having a lawyer for simple traffic matters.

    Be honest, be precise, no bullshit, don't get aggro and no waffle.

  • googdi on 20/11/2016 - 21:39

    I also drive 500 plus KMs a week. I agree that there might be few close traffic calls in these years but i don't take on the lights or speeding intentionally.
    In case I'm eligible for internal review process, I would like to know what's the downside for requesting internal review. The only thing i can think of is some time to write an internal review request.
    Any reasons for not going with internal review process?

    • gizmocc on 21/11/2016 - 11:22
      -1

      You are eligible for "one" Internal Review for ANY fines EXCEPT excessive speeding, drink or drug driving.

      You have two choices. 1. Review the infringement as you believe it was unjust. Mention why do you think it was unjust. Attach stat dec and/or any proof (like statement of witness/es, photos/videos, which you don't have).
      2. Admit the offence and ask for Official Warning, as you have a very good driving record and there is no other fines in 5 years.

      Internal Review and Official Warning are reviewed case by case. Nobody can confirm you outright if it is going to be accepted or rejected. BUT for red light offences, it is very unlikely that you'll be successful.

      I'd highly recommend to go for an internal review first and see what happens. It takes roughly 90 days to make a decision and your due date will be on hold during the process.

      If the review is rejected, you still can take it to court or pay in full or setup a payment plan.

      Good luck.

  • tonyjzx on 20/11/2016 - 21:39
    +1

    Any officer will tell you they can follow anyone for 5-10-15 mins and invariably, they will do something wrong that could result in a fine.

    Did you touch the centre line? Did you accelerate too quickly? Did you indicate too short a distance?

    When your offense book is hundreds of pages long and your penalise everything then of course you're guilty of something at least once a day if you drive.

  • lethalmoney on 20/11/2016 - 22:38
    +1

    your review will not be accepted based on the inherent risks that red (amber, same offence) light running causes. It is a major reason for injuries/road toll on our roads. That along with distracted drivers, and drink/drug drivers.

    Given you were intercepted by a HWP unit, there will be two police members who will provide statements if required to the offence. You won't have a leg to stand on. the HWP members have a steady stream of offences in front of their faces all shift. If they've pulled you over, and cited an infringement notice… fair chances.

    A review will bide you another couple of weeks to pay the fine. There are no extra costs involved. Court costs, yes. but not for an internal review.

    Learn, move on. Yes fines suck. that's the whole point of deterrence.

  • phluffed on 21/11/2016 - 02:48

    My only question for you was what were you doing to be distracted enough that you didn't notice the light turning orange? For there to be debate in your mind vs the HWP officer on if the light was orange or red when you went through it suggests that it was right on the bubble. This would mean that it was orange for around 3s prior to you crossing the line.
    @70kmh that means you would be 58m from the lights at the change.
    @40kmh you would have been 33m away.
    Far too late for me to be working the rest out, but given that you would be breaking to slow for the corner anyway, there was still plenty of time if you had seen the change.

    Ask for a review if you want, go to court if it's a matter of principle and you don't mind paying more to defend yourself than the fine would have been anyway. Just be 1000% sure you are right because they do have cameras, it's not just his word.

  • NickosFoivos on 21/11/2016 - 07:29
    -6

    It is quite ridiculous how the Gov loves collecting money from us this way. It is disgusting.

    The other day I parked outside of my bro's school to pick him up, and in less than 5' I see a ticket for illegal parking. They were on the wrong but was hard af to prove myself right. Shows how desperate they are.

    Awful. Not sure how we have come to this point.

    • Skramit on 21/11/2016 - 08:42
      +7

      It is quite ridiculous how the Gov loves collecting money from us this way. It is disgusting.

      No it's not.

      Red light running is just about THE most dangerous common offence possible on the road. More than speeding but not as dangerous as drink driving. Running red lights leads to "T-bone" accidents which are often more deadly than front on accidents due to no crumple zone on the side of your vehicle.

      My friend was in a t-bone accident because of a red light runner on Nepean Hwy (80kmh) who either wasn't paying attention or tried to run the red light, and he was in hospital for ~3 months with multiple broken bones. His engine ended up on the seat next to him. Lucky to survive because somebody ran a red light.

      So please don't spurt nonsense like this is a money collecting exercise. Every time I see a red light runner get flashed by the red light camera, I cheer :)

      I have 0 sympathy for the OP, (sorry mate) because lights are timed so that there is always ample time to stop at an orange light. You were either going way too quick or chanced your arm right on the edge of it turning red. So accept your fine and move on.

  • noramando on 21/11/2016 - 10:04

    I am not sure about the law in Victoria. NSW is currently has a higher road fatalities than last year and the cops are very serious to get their money back (or preventing increase the loss of life), there is no pleading and they pick on anything they can see at fault. I had an incident that I needed to re-buckle my safety belt and I got booked for not wearing my seatbelt. A cop drove pass me at a T junction which I was about 50 m from the junction. RTA said that the cop must be correct because

    1. He is a sergeant or something similar.
    2. He saw it himself
    3. He is a police officer and abide by the law (law on his side), therefore he is correct.
    4. Good cop bad cop, he is still a cop. When no evidence can be presented, he is always correct.
    5. The court is very busy and they do not waste tax payer's time and money.
    6. Fast money

    Therefore there was no doubt. I questioned the lack of evidence because there was no camera and there were 2 cops in the police car and that was bias. Still I got fine and points deducted.

    Just pay the fine and move on. You are in no win situation. NSW is desperate to get road toll down.

    In Asia, China and US, all deducted points expire in 1 year but 3 years in Australia. There is an administration problem or the system is not working. The government will not amid this fact. Heavy penalty does not produce better drivers (fact).

  • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 10:28

    I would just ask myself whether I had any doubt about it myself, otherwise Judge Judy will shred you for $2000. Unless you are $2000 sure of yourself and can convey that confidence in court, accept the fine. Based on the 'greyness' above, I think you have a bit of internal doubt. The fine is harsh, so vent here and pay the fine, probably.

    If you said these two lines in court, I think you would lose "it was a red arrow not the Red light." and "i believe that I didn't cross the intersection after the red arrow.". They suggest you knowingly entered under orange. It then becomes discretion of whether it was unsafe to stop.

  • Cheeper on 21/11/2016 - 10:54
    +2

    The best advice you will ever get on this is just pay it and learn from your mistake.
    Amber does mean stop, not accelerate. Even at 70kph you would have had sufficient time to stop if you had been paying attention.

  • MaMan on 21/11/2016 - 10:59
    +1

    It is simple. If you were already in the intersection and the light turned Amber you are OK.

    If you entered the intersection on Amber then you are screwed

    • John Dough on 21/11/2016 - 13:02
      -1

      Nope you are wrong. Stop at amber only if it's safe to do so. i.e not a full ABS lock up.
      Entering an intersection while it's amber happens nearly every light change in major intersections and is not illegal in any way.
      Read up and study the actual law, don't post your opinions like they are facts because it will mislead people.

      • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 15:34

        MaMan is right. Read the road rules daniel.

        • John Dough on 22/11/2016 - 07:59
          -1

          Nope he is not right at all, maybe you could do with a refresher.
          Stop on the amber if you can safely, stop on the red always without exception - straight from the rule book.
          If everyone slammed their brakes on at the hint of an amber light it would be chaos.

          MaMan says "If you entered the intersection on Amber then you are screwed"
          This is absolute rubbish.

          "If you entered the intersection on Amber, when it was safe to stop, then you may receive a fine"
          There fixed it.

          Red light cameras will only take a snappie if you enter the intersection after the light goes red (and a good half a second later to allow for the rear axle).

          I can argue the facts all day….

        • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2016 - 09:28
          +1

          @greydaniel: I don't think you have a legal leg to stand on there.

          For your perusal, inter alia, straight from Road Safety Road Rules 2009 (Legislation Victoria Road Rules 2009)

          57 Stopping for a yellow traffic light or arrow
          (1) A driver approaching or at traffic lights showing a yellow traffic light must stop—
          (a) if there is a stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the stop line—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the stop line;

          or

          (b) if there is no stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the traffic lights—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the nearest or only traffic lights;

          or

          (c) if the traffic lights are at an intersection and the driver cannot stop safely in accordance with paragraph (a) or (b), but can stop safely before entering the intersection—before entering the intersection— and must not proceed past the stop line or nearest or only traffic lights, or into the intersection (as the case may be), until the traffic lights show a green or flashing yellow traffic light or no traffic light.

          Penalty: 5 penalty units.
          Note: Enter, intersection, stop line and yellow traffic light are defined in the dictionary

        • John Dough on 22/11/2016 - 11:19
          -3

          @zapy:
          It's What I have said all along.
          Do you actually know how to interpret this extract from the rule book?
          Obviously not.

      • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 17:20
        +3

        I think you are wrong, greydaniel. The onus is to prove that stopping wasn't safe. "yellow: you must stop unless you can't stop safely ".

        If there was no pushy car behind and weather conditions were dry and no emergency vehicles etc, stopping most likely would have been safe. While you might drive with the mentality that you commit to going through, saying that you commited to going through even if the lights changed in court might look silly.

  • blitz on 21/11/2016 - 15:13
    +2

    I hear that if you get the right judge they'll let it go to a dance-off. No harm in trying.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 17:22
    +2

    Hey mate, I've worked at Civic Compliance Victoria for 2 years, and I can honestly say to not bother electing to go to court and just pay the fine. The rule is if you can safely stop at a yellow light then you have to, but if you disagree that it was safe to stop then it's your word against the officers, and they'll always side with the officer unless you have some sort of video evidence that it wasnt.

  • netsurfer on 21/11/2016 - 17:42
    -1

    The biggest drawback going to court is that in the event you ended up losing, you will need to tick yes in future job application form(s) on the question: have you been charged for a criminal offense? You will need to mention this in future job interviews that it is basically for a traffic infringement. However, if you work for your own business, then I guess it is not an issue.

    You "think" your car crossed the line when the light is amber colour. That's not a good sign. Also, a few things about VIC police / highway patrol:

    • Unlike NSW police, sometimes they forgot to mention your conversation is being recorded (so whatever you said with them can be used in court).
    • You cannot be sure about there is no proof (unless you actually asked the highway patrol police and the police actually said no - unlikely).

    Good track record can only be used to ask for warning instead of fine/demerit points for minor speeding offence. Red light, no.

  • BertieBrown on 21/11/2016 - 17:50
    +2

    It seems like a lot of people believe that they're potential case will turn out differently to the myriad of other instances that are reported to them but they still insist on taking the chance, only to then lose and have a higher cost to pay.

    It just appears that it's awfully hard for some people to learn from other's mistakes.

    From everything I've ever read about court, it seems like it's almost always better to avoid it if at all possible, and generally a fairly unpleasant experience regardless of the outcome.

  • [Deactivated] on 21/11/2016 - 18:36
    -1

    netsurfer The biggest drawback going to court is that in the event you ended up losing, you will need to tick yes in future job application form(s) on the question: have you been charged for a criminal offense?

    What a load of crock. It's a traffic offence not a criminal offence. Drink driving is a criminal offence.

    Jawanzar From everything I've ever read about court, it seems like it's almost always better to avoid it if at all possible, and generally a fairly unpleasant experience regardless of the outcome.

    I have been to court twice in about 20 years and won both times. Lets just say it is an interesting experience seeing the other half.

  • OzBrogains on 21/11/2016 - 19:19
    +2

    Be a good boy and pay the fine

  • [Deactivated] on 22/11/2016 - 07:59

    Get a good dash cam

    • bargaino on 22/11/2016 - 13:19
      +1

      Even a 'bad' dash-cam is enough here, so long as it is reliable. You don't need high-def.
      Either it gives evidence for court, or more likely shows you were in the wrong which is good too, as it avoids a lot of stress.
      I'd feel much better paying the fine if I knew I was wrong.

  • Mysterious Laptop on 22/11/2016 - 16:45

    Definitely need a dash cam in this situation. Cops can really say whatever the heck they want, and if it's a close call they're most likely going to ping you. Then you're stuffed because it's your word against theirs.

    I honestly do believe OP was correct and probably did cross the yellow light (but a really close one) that a dash cam would've proved innocent. I would say pay the fine to avoid wasting extra money.

    but did you ask the policeman for the footage?

  • Some Human on 24/11/2016 - 21:03
    +1

    This happened to me a few years ago. Went through a light when it was orange, got pulled over by Vic Roads and copped a fine.
    Instead of going through the headache of fighting it, I just paid it and moved on. Stress gone. You could try writing to Civic Compliance and explain that you honestly didn't believe it was safe to stop, then see what they say…or just pay it.
    Don't go to court unless you enjoy being stressed and potentially even further out of pocket.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join