Hey guys
Need your advice on this Red Light Infringement. I was new to the area and went in the lane that was turning right. I did not go right but went straight (can be seen in the second image) but the camera detected it and received the Infringement.
https://ibb.co/7gNQBtL
https://ibb.co/0BMp2Hb
Do you guys think there is a a chance I can get out of it if I take it to court?
Your advice would be much appreciated.
Thanks for reading.
I was new to the area
Is that also the excuse you'll use when you end up hitting a car or pedestrian?
Haven't you heard of the 12 month grace period?
NSW?
If so, submit a review and it will be cancelled (not cautioned). As technically you have not gone through (turned), but gone straight ahead. You have broken a road rule and gone straight ahead from a turning lane, but the camera legislation does not allow you to be infringed for that, a Police Officer on the otherhand can get you for it.
QLD unfortunately. I'll try to find out if they have a similar review process
From memory QLD was Court only to dispute. But that could have changed.
Every bozo at the top of this thread "NA ITS STIL A VALID FOINE JUST PAY IT AND MOVE ON"
Christ
Ever consider turning right and making making legal turns to get back to road you wanted to continue on? Sick of seeing people make illegal turns/lane changes just because it would inconvenience them to do it correctly/safely. Take the fine and pay more attention to driving in the future.
you know what they say, good drivers misses their turns, bad drivers never do
Love how Ozbargain seems to be fully of drivers who have literally never broken a road rule in their life.
From the pictures the illegal lane change seems completely innocuous and doesn't look to have been dangerous, it's the sort of thing that I doubt a cop would pull you over for if they witnessed it. So you've never gotten in a turning lane and then changed your mind and moved out of the lane and gone straight ahead if it was safe?
Might be able to trade it for these
Disobeying a traffic lane arrow Queensland Road Rules—Section 92(1) 3 $115
Failing to give a proper left or right change of direction signal Queensland Road Rules—Section 46(1) and Section 48(1) 2 $86
Trade not possible, evidence likely won't be accepted.
No fine at all 💯
So you followed the info on the fine and they knocked the appeal back then?
No I just received the fine. I think the only way to appeal is to take it to court.
If you think that then you are going to pay way more than the fine as you will need to pay court costs.
But looking at the Google map, theres also a right arrow if you are coming from the other direction. This means that the turning arrows might be on a different sequence & both turn green while the straight ahead remains red.
Without knowing anything about your driving record no one can really recommend anything. I mean, you might have got five speeding infringements in the past 12 months, or you might have never had any sort of infringement in the past.
I once got out of a speeding infringement by writing a letter. Basically cited a very good driving record and was let off. Instead of asking a bunch of randoms here, crafting a letter would be a better use of your time to be honest as you won’t get any sympathy here.
Next time you find yourself in this situation remember this: there is more than one way to skin a cat. If you miss a turn just follow through with it and find another way to get to your destination. Don’t swerve out of your lane last minute. At least you’re not in Sydney, where if you miss a turn you’re going to have to take an extremely long and silly detour.
Thanks for the advice. Do you know where I can send this appeal letter to? As per the fine the only 3 options are:
1. Pay the fine
2. Submit a declaration - if I was not the driver
3. Take it to court.
Disobey directional on road AND proceed through red light
I like how you blocked your plates and no one elses..
There is no mail in review/leniency system in QLD because as of 2009 they consider all mail traffic fines reviewed already for any grey areas.
So this is what you have to follow to contest it.
https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/fines/contest
So you have to select going to court.
"I'm new to the area/lost" doesn't count as an excuse. Pick a lane and if it turns out to be wrong do a U turn when legally able too. Simple.
They actually had a TV news story a few months ago after people complained about "This little known traffic rule." Which was going straight while green while the lane they where in has a red light and getting pinged by cameras.
Over half the car is in the turning lane at the time of the first camera image. So it would consider you in the turning lane.
By fighting you will pretty much have to plead guilty to something lower and as pegaxs posted your going to likely need to plead guilty to more then what this fine is worth.
The court case would be for this one offense, and the fine will be dismissed of course.
They can't show up to court and start adding other random offenses to the case.
The prosecution would never lose if that was possible. 'Ahhh so you maybe didn't rob the bank… but here you are j-walking outside - Guilty!' lol
Do you think taking it to court is worth a shot?
Yes. The fine will be dismissed.
@trapper: yair I reckon it's certainly worth a try - you had a green light for straight ahead, which is what you did.
the red light camera caught you because you were partly in the right-turn-only lane, so they could try to argue about that, but I think you should get off.
@trapper: I'm not so sure. If the fine was "turning right on a red arrow" OP will definitely get off. But the offence was ”failed to stop at a red light" which he failed to do
@42: The short form offence description is of minimal importance. Reading the road rules, which section number was broken?
I've made a more detailed comment below, but you might want to check this out: https://www.facebook.com/9NewsQueensland/videos/270793482280…. Funnily enough, this was shot at the exact same intersection as your infringement.
@DontShowMeTheMoney: That is gold. Wanted a sign put up warning motorists!
How ‘bout following the road rules and not whinging when you are caught.
The court case would be for this one offense, and the fine will be dismissed of course.
The facebook video https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2707934822802547 DontShowMeTheMoney thank you for posting. Everyone else go read their post on page two -> https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/12473823/redir it as that was the story I saw way older then I thought (I guess that was why i couldn't find it as I thought it was newer) shows it being an actual offense. Also seems pretty rare to get off.
The way traffic court works in QLD. You can argue your case to a traffic officer before going to a judge.
Lets say you where done going into the second tier speeding fine so "At least 11km/h but not more than 20km/h over the speed limit." lets say 72kmph in a 60 zone.
If you take it to court before you get to the judge you can say to the traffic officer. "Yes I was speeding I will admit I was only doing 70km/h" they might say yes we will agree to that (good or bad driving history blah blah.) You sign the form say yes I did it. The fine and points will be lowered agree to pay court costs and go home. The fine will get reissued for 1-10Kms over the limit and pay that and the court costs on a second notice when they come in the mail a week later. They don't throw it out "well it was 72km/h or nothing ever happened." It isn't that black and white in that it either happened or didn't.
If the OP does get off on this but they might have to give a really good reason as to why where they driving in 2 lanes with over half their car in a turning lane and then continuing straight?
Since it is actually a an offense to do what the OP did. OP might have to plead guilty to a lower offense for them to take the first offense. Which was what I was saying.
The dingus I live with had to take a fine to court in QLD. But wanted to argue over the address of the offense. As far as anyone knows the motorway's location was suburb A the infringement listed Suburb B. Went to a traffic layer who said yes. "How can you be fined for driving on a full speed motorway that simply doesn't exist?"
The dingus mentioned this to the traffic officer. The Traffic Officer's reply was "That isn't any issue on our end we can update the fine to show Suburb A on it if you have evidence to show the location is wrong." The google maps actually shows 3 different suburbs changing every 100m which was why it was thought to argue over the technicality of the location. So they do have the power to reissue fines for technicalities.
That was the plan A they went and spoke to a traffic lawyer who wrote out all these things. To say the following if it didn't work.
Plan B was some another thing. Which the traffic officer said didn't apply in QLD.
Plan C was admit guilty to a lower offense. Traffic officer said this is perfectly fine and they both agreed to the new offence. Original fine thrown out lower fine for less points replaced. Paid the fine and costs the day after they got it to say thank you. So it is entirely possible for offense A to became offense B.
looks like you ran the red light to me. red arrow, went across line
OP, you've got what you have deserved - ignorance of law excuses no one.
More like he knew the risks and calculated it to be worth it, but he was bad at math.
That right-turn lane is a slip lane that breaks away from the main lane over a block before the intersection, and it's clearly marked with turning arrows from its inception. Just how are you going to plead ignorance? You basically had to change lanes to get into that lane in the first place.
And drove over 3 more turn arrows and passed a "Right lane MUST turn right" sign…
This is the last nail in the coffin. It's right lane MUST turn right. Not right lane SHOULD turn right.
In other words it's not optional. If your in the right lane you don't get to leave it once the solid white line starts.
It may have been less arrows if he turned into the road from Orford.
He's not going to plead ignorance.
He's going to say - The red light was for turning right. As shown by the photos, I did not turn right. Case closed.
You see, that’s where you are wrong… he did run the red. OP was in the right turn lane and the right turn lane had a red arrow.
QLD Road Rule 56 says;
56 Stopping on a red traffic light or arrow
(1) A driver approaching or at traffic lights showing a red traffic light—
(a) must stop—
(i) if there is a stop line at or near the traffic lights—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the stop line;
Regardless if OP went straight, the lane they were in had a red light and OP was required to stop at or before the stop line.
If the lights were green and OP went straight, sure, different laws apply., but the rule that applies here is, OP was in right lane, right lane was required to stop, OP didn’t stop and continued over the stop line, ergo, breaking road rule 56. As soon as he crossed the line, he broke the road rule, irrespective of what he did after crossing the line.
Cross referencing with rule 59 & 60 plus the definitions section of the road rules may be illuminating for you. (ie: you write many words well, but are wrong at law)
Red traffic light is not equal to a red traffic arrow (read the definitions). In the example given by the OP there was no red traffic light. As such the clause you just quoted is completely irrelevant.
@factor: I don’t get how RR59 is even relevant (or the dictionary for that matter)
And RR60, OP was literally in a turning lane that says you can only turn right. By being in that lane, OP is indicating to the cars around them that their intention is to turn right at the lights, ergo, the right turn traffic arrow applies to their lane. RR60 just reinforces what RR56 says.
As soon as OP crossed over the stop line in the right turn only lane, they have committed an offence under RR56.
I may not be a lawyer, but there is no way in hell I would be using your example as a defence in court.
“You see, your honour, I wasn’t turning, I was going straight, so that red arrow doesn’t apply to me… in that right hand turn only lane… and road rule 60 says I’m allowed to go because there was also a green light.”
Because you are being pedantic, further reading from RR56;
(1B) Subsection (2) applies to a driver—
(a) approaching or at traffic arrows showing a red traffic arrow who is turning in the direction indicated by the arrow; or
(b) approaching or at traffic arrows showing a red traffic arrow, in a marked lane with a traffic lane arrow applying to the lane indicating a single direction that is the same direction as the red traffic arrow.
(2) The driver—
(a) must stop—
(i) if there is a stop line at or near the traffic arrows—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the stop line
(1B)(b) applies to OP. In a marked lane with a traffic arrow facing a red traffic arrow, they must stop.
There is no exemption that says “unless in that right turn only lane they want to break another law under these rules and just go straight ahead… if that’s what they want to do, ignore this whole rule…”
@pegaxs: ah the resident OzB lawyer lol
I hope nobody listens or pays attention to this guy because he will say "it's your fault, pay up" every time.
I once had a similar experience as the OP although my front right wheel barely touched the stop line in the turning lane because I changed my direction earlier than the OP.
All I had to do is write a letter and point out that I didn't turn right as per the photo, I was not endangering any other motorists, which the red light infringement is designed to prevent. I also wrote that I would be happy to pay the fine for changing lane over solid white line, but not for running red light.
I didn't even have to go to court and I received a letter in couple of weeks confirming that the fine has been withdrawn and I wasn't issued any other infringement notice in its place.
You certainly wrote a lot of inaccurate legal mumbo jumbo just to arrive at wrong advice lol
I remember your aggressive, offensive comments when I posted about tyre damage from pot hole in shopping centre carpark. You also posted a whole lot of legal mumbo jumbo at the time, coming up with a lot of fictional stories of how it may have happened and how I have no leg to stand on. Guess what? I got paid out in a week from posting that so you were wrong, yet again.
In your own word, you said may not be a lawyer. Yes, you are not. Stop trying to be something you are not because you are not very good at it lol
The joke is on bozos all over this thread telling the OP he has no leg to stand on and pay up.
I hope everyone learns a lesson from this. Never ask any legal or traffic infringement question on OzBargain because the advice given will usually be wrong, unhelpful and they just enjoy posting toxic comment, something along the line of "It's your fault, pay up and move on"
@dji1111111: Oh yeah, I remember you. The guy that didn’t get the confirmation bias he was seeking, fought with everyone that didn’t take your side and got half your comments removed from that thread for being inflammatory remarks and then got the thread closed so people would stop telling you what reality was really like. And I believe in that thread I actively encouraged you to ring them and make a claim.
I never professed to be a lawyer, I just point out what law has been applied and the possible reason why it has been applied and what angle they are going to use to deny any review of the infringement.
The issue with this site is that 90+% people who post traffic related questions like this here are usually in the wrong and are only seeking to get out of paying a ticket that they 100% deserve. And I remember the last time someone came in with a valid reason for an incorrect infringement, I did try and help them with what the law actually said and how to go about fighting it and I was downvoted to oblivion. So, I too can’t win, even when I do think the OP has a valid reason to fight the ticket.
And your advice/example is super helpful. It’s basically nothing like OP’s. You changed earlier and barely touched the line. I can see how that is the same as OP’s photos.
And please, help me correct my knowledge. Just what part of the mumbo jumbo I was posting was wrong (considering it is directly cut and pasted from QLD RR legislation) And what “advice” did I give that was wrong? Can you point to the post where I said “just pay up”?
Anyway, good to know I live up in that head of yours, rent free, even after 4 months. Don’t forget to follow me around, make snide comments and drop random negs on out of context comments so you can “teach me a lesson”.
@pegaxs: Haha well how useful was it for idiots to tell me I had no chance yet I got compensated without trouble in a week? Lol
Lot of words posted by idiots to be wrong
How is it not useful to the OP? Nice job with mincing the words. Yes, you confirmed yet again that you should stop acting like you know even a tiny bit about law just copy pasting sections of legislation. Where does it say in the legislation that the amount that you touch the line makes a difference to whether it's considered an infringement? Lol
Legally, I've essentially done the same thing as the OP and I got the fine withdrawn with zero issues.
Another fine gesture from the self appointed resident lawyer who gets every single thing wrong haha
PS it was good getting paid out for the tyres lol
Live in my head? Lol yeah so does criminals I read about. Happy now? You are a serial offender.
@pegaxs: Hey, pasting your post with legislation, bolding crap and using abbreviations like RR and words like subsection doesn't make a correct legal advice or interpretation. It's embarrassing lol
@dji1111111: Ok, champ. Next thread, I'll just hand it over to you. Your anecdotal evidence far outweighs any legislation I can find. Way more solid advice.
"Have you tried the dji11111111111111111111111111111111111 defence?"
words like subsection doesn't make a correct legal advice (yikes, English much??)
I guess you are referring to where I quoted;
(1B) Subsection (2) applies to a driver—
As for this, the word "subsection" wasn't my pick, it's literally how this rule is worded in the "Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009" for which, from now on, I will only be using the full title of the legislation because you don't like "RR".
You would be far more entertaining if you were not so uneducated, so confrontational or, for that matter, so wrong. :)
All this salt because I made a comment you didn't like 4 months ago. Troll harder.
@pegaxs: Your post in one sentence. A bunch of random sections of the legislation copy & pasted to make it look like you know what you are talking about
I did not not like your comment. I'm commenting because you have a habit of pushing your personal wish as legal stance lol
Nothing you say now will change the fact that you posted BS saying I had no chance of getting compensated (proven wrong) and that OP has no chance of getting the fine withdrawn (proven wrong again) lol
Stick to what you know best (that is if there is anything)
@dji1111111: I like replying to you. It's like shooting fish in a barrel…
A bunch of random sections of the legislation
Not random. It's the exact legislation that covers OP's incident. I didn't paste legislation for say using foglights as to why OP got fined. So, troll harder.
I did not not like your comment.
Ok, champ. It's only been 4 months and you're still frothing at the bung over it.
you have a habit of pushing your personal wish as legal stance
No I don't. People ask "why was I fined?" and I just post the relevant legislation. I do get a lot of belly laughs out of confirmation bias posts though, when I post the actual legislation and it doesn't align with what they want the legislation to say and they get all butt hurt thinking that personally wrote the legislation… :D
you posted BS saying I had no chance of getting compensated
I didn't say that at all. Nowhere in your last post did I say you would not get compensated. I said "go for it" and "let us know how you went", but you sooked and got the thread closed. But I can see how you thinking I said you had no chance helps you get all mad an angry at me. I mean it's pretty hard to get mad an angry at someone who tells you to "bung it on and see what they say".
(proven wrong)
Proven wrong? How? Your made up shit? LOL.
OP has no chance of getting the fine withdrawn
Where did I say this? Link please.
(proven wrong again)
I was proved wrong (for something I didn't say in the first place.)??? OP got off their ticket? That is good news. We need more drivers like OP in the world.
Stick to what you know best
I will. And you just stick to making shit up that didn't happen and doesn't exist so you can continue to be angry at me over shit I never said. Don't ever change, champ.
I see UFO has schooled you in this thread as well…. Gonna stalk them and be angry at their comments for the next 4 months? :D
Only read your original post.
Yes you should fight this ticket. Usually in your scenario, the ticket never gets issued.
What was the offence code, what was the alleged offence?
There is no code, just says "Fail to stop at red light"
Is there any chance you can post an image of the ticket (with all your details removed?)
I'm not up to speed on QLD traffic law, but in VIC, a red light is the round thing, a red arrow is obviously the arrow shaped thing.
You can't be guilty of a red light offence, as it was green. You shouldn't be guilty of a red arrow, because you didn't turn.
You are guilty of not turning in accordance with the painted arrow. You are guilty of changing lanes over a solid white line. But you haven't received a ticket for either of these offences.
I would love to see the ticket - you can PM me the image if you don't want it public - again, remove all your details if you do
It would be very difficult to prove any of these other offenses either based on just these two photos anyway.
OP could have been in the left lane with the intent to go straight through and then only partially crossed into the turning lane for some unknown reason.
And there are many reasons where it would be reasonable and legal for OP to do this.
Avoiding an collision, a pedestrian, a cyclist, an emergency vehicle, road cones, manoeuvring past a breakdown or other accident, even some random object on the road he was avoiding etc
You are not instantly guilty the moment your wheel crosses a solid white line.
Adding to the fact that just after the driveway to the School on the left, is a sign that says "Right Lane Must Turn Right"
It's pretty cut and dry. You're gonna have to cop this one on the chin and chalk it up a lesson learnt.
Unrelated to OP's issue, but are the dotted lines across the intersection really necessary?
Are there that many incompetent drivers who cannot continue on a straight line to end up on the other side of an intersection so we need to add a guide for them?
As for OP, they haven't pinged you for the correct offence but you have made a (or multiple) offenses regardless. Let this be a lesson for you. The alternative offenses could end up costing you more than red light so be careful.
I've never heard of anyone that's been fined for not indicating even though it happens all the time. I would fight the red light fine as you didn't run a red light and the fine is nearly $600 and 3 dermit points, a lesser fine would be applicable for changing lanes without indicating. Half of the drivers I see on the road don't indicate (couldn't find any information to say there is an applicable fine) or don't turn off their indicators (definitely an offence with an applicable fine) .
IANAL,
There's another take to this; what exactly was your fine for? If it says something like Turning Right on Red, then you clearly haven't actually done that in those two photos, and you can definitely go to court and argue.
Obviously then they can book you for crossing/changing lanes on unbroken lines; but the twist is, can a red light camera catch people changing lanes on unbroken lines? (The answer is they're not there for that purpose, but yes the can).
So instead of running a red you get a change lanes on unbroken lines fine, but perhaps they won't do that.
So instead of running a red you get a change lanes on unbroken lines fine, but perhaps they won't do that.
There are circumstances you can cross unbroken lines - single or double - provided it is safe to do so.
Yea. Tell them to remove the fine for running a red light and to fine you for 1. Illegally crossing over a solid line, 2. Turning left from a right turning lane, 3. Changing lanes in the middle of an intersection, 4. Not using your indicator
You clearly overtook a bicycle just prior to the photo being taken, crossing unbroken lines to provide a safe passing distance and that you were merging back into your lane right to proceed through the intersection.
Argue that you when you overtook said bicycle that you had clear line of sight and that it was safe to perform the manoeuvre of crossing the unbroken lines.
I did the same thing (sydney) - stopped at a red arrow turning right but decided I wanted to go straight so indicated left and went straight. Red light camera flashed, I received a fine. Appealed it and they waived it. It was a broken line separating the lanes though, whereas yours is a solid line so that may make a difference to the likelihood of a successful appeal
If a layman has to judge your condition vs OP’s, they would sympathise with you as the risk appetite is very low as compared to OP. So waiver makes sense for u.
Never do another wrong thing to make a wrong right. OP may learn from the fine.
Never underestimate the red light camera unless your Paul Keating :)
hahaha yeah classic
I’d be interested to know the outcome of any appeal. Common sense would suggest you didn’t break the red light rules except of course if the law says something like ‘enter intersection from lane that has a red light’ or something like that. And you did do that. In addition you crossed an unbroken line to do so. I wonder if they might end up sending you a fine for that if you do appeal.
I always say to people, if you stuffed up and missed a turn or exit on freeway. Don’t panic and try to go back or slam the brakes or whatever, go to the next opportunity to turn around. You’ll only (generally) lose a max 5 or so minutes
I always say to people, if you stuffed up and missed a turn or exit on freeway. Don’t panic and try to go back or slam the brakes or whatever, go to the next opportunity to turn around. You’ll only (generally) lose a max 5 or so minutes
Ie. Don't fix a mistake with another mistake
No, not really. You need to give an example. Speaking in abstract concepts doesn’t translate into real world experiences.
except of course if the law says something like ‘enter intersection from lane that has a red light’
This one wouldn't work anyway as it's very common for the same lane to have a green to go straight through but a red for turning right.
Even if you didn't get done for red light you'll be done for illegal lane change
Either way it's going to cost you dollars
Appealing this would be a huge gamble.
On the offence failed to stop/obey at red turn signal it would be hard to argue that you obeyed the signal. The line was crossed and the signal for that lane was red.
You may well get slapped for extra offences
Really? Right lane must turn right, went straight. Earlier post says indicated to change lanes, solid line so can't cross it to change lanes. Pic suggests you didn't stop behind the stop line. Dont know the area? Rules a the same within state boundaries, you knew you were in a right turn lane, take the turn and fix you mistake laterwithin the rules.
Suggest looking up definition of must, dudes at a court will already know. I would take the red light fine and run, court will only add other offences. Think yourself lucky this is not a post titled - changed lanes illegally into another car, who is at fault?
You were incorrectly fined for a red light offense that you did not commit.
You may have broken other road rules here… but you did not run a red light.
You will almost certainly get off this fine, so write in and appeal.
They did run a red though as OP is in the turning lane and entered the intersection in that lane. OP then broke the law again by going straight from a turning lane. Not a chance they get out of this, and fighting it could lead to more charges if the police wanted.
The red light was for turning traffic, he did not turn.
He may have broken other road rules but that doesn't matter, he received no fine for these.
So they'll review the pictures and fine OP for merging over a solid unbroken line and changing lanes in an intersection.
@Caped Baldy: No the police don't vindictively go looking for other offenses when they got the first one wrong. It will just be dismissed and life goes on.
OP was in the lane that has to turn, and went through the red light in that lane. Just because he also broke the law and didn't turn doesn't mean that he didn't break the law for going through the red light.
and fighting it could lead to more charges if the police wanted.
Is this the kind of country you think we live in? Where innocent people who don't accept guilt will face police vengeance.
Lol no, he did run the red light as evidenced by the pictures.
Running a red light doesn't have the prerequisite that you complete the turn, he was in the right lane and the light was red, he continued forward therefore running the red light.
Whenever I see these I immediately think that it's a troll post. Anyone seriously questioning a ticket would be hitting up a lawyer who specialises in disputing tickets. In 5 mins, they'll tell you if it's something worth fighting compared to a bunch of uninformed/misinformed/out of state people.
Unfortunately common sense and fairness are contradictory to our road laws.
You broke the law either way, so just cop the fine. You can't change lanes in an intersection, and you can't change lanes over a solid line, and you did actually run the red, so you should count yourself lucky you're only getting 1 fine.
Technically he did not commit a red light offence, however he did fail to stay in the right turning lane (solid lines) and changed lane in the middle of the intersection. With a lawyer I'd say he'd have a chance of getting out of the red light fine, but may end up charged for illegal lane change.
Suck it up and pay it.
Technically he did not commit a red light offence
He went through a red for the lane that he was in, so yes, he did.
AFAIK the lights govern the act, not the particular lane - if he'd done an illegal right turn from the left lane, it wouln't become ok because "my lane had a green" (or when both lanes may go ahead, you can't turn on the red arrow even though there will be only one light with an "arrow" template, and one light that will be solid colours).
It's interesting everyone refers to OP as "he".
Do we know for a fact that OP's gender is male?
I think you have not crossed the red light
Error with Camera detection
You will get it waived
If you will take it to court
Your fine is likely to be withdrawn
Qld red light law:
You must not drive past the stop line on the road at a red traffic light or, if there is no stop line, the traffic light.
You must not drive IN THE DIRECTION of the red traffic arrow past the stop line at the traffic light or, if there is no stop line, the traffic light
Technically you did neither of these things so you have a good legal argument to get the red light charge dismissed.
If you are guilty of something else and If they can be bothered to send it back to re investigate and then charge you with something else is possible but probably not that likely. I'd argue this charge politely to the judge and try not to ruffle the prosecution.
How in the hell did you manage to drive up to multiple massive right turning arrows on the road (2 can be seen on google street view) alongside a red arrow on the lights (that had been active for over a minute)… and then realise you were in the right turning lane?
Doesn’t make sense. The excuse of “I’m new to the area” is disturbing. This scenario happens all the time, in thousands of places.
Bad driving 101. See this stupid stuff on the roads and people hold up traffic because they clearly arnt paying attention.
Pay the fine, call it a lesson learned.
Decent chance they merged without checking. Seems like very inattentive or distracted driving. Seems like low amounts of traffic so not sure how it happened otherwise.
multiple massive right turning arrows on the road
He merged onto a right turning lane with FOUR right arrows
I don't get people that drive like you.
You're in the right lane which is clearly right turn only but you think you're better than anyone else and can just ignore the rules.
Why wouldn't you just turn right and then come back…. oh wait, already answered that myself, you think you're better than anyone else and can do whatever you like whenever you like.
lmao. you act as if he did this to get out of the massive que in the left lane…. how did you get to the summary that hes better than everyone else?
Someone's hurt him in the past hahaha. OP's in the wrong, hopefully they get a learning experience out of it. They should still try to appeal but shouldn't hold their breath.
Ah so you're one of the people that think they can do whatever they want on the roads as well, who cares about signs and rules right.
We'll see one day when your child gets run over by one of these people how quickly your tune will change.
I think you may can get the SDRO to review it first as you didnt turn right , made a mistake or confused on the street.
Ive seen a lot of these cameras flashes and always wonder if fines will be sent.
I always thought there will be someone actually see the pictures for review before fines get send.
I guess not. Good luck ….
What state is this?
Have done this in NSW with the camera going off, fortunately received no fine. My understanding is that you didn't run the red so shouldn't receive the fine. Red light camera doesn't have the jurisdiction to charge you for other offences.
It would be a different story if a police officer stopped you as I believe you would be done for a different offence such as dangerous driving or illegal lane change.
this is my experience as well. You could get fined for this by a police who witnessed it but a fine generated via the Red Light Camera you should be able to have it reversed without even going to court (can be done easily online in NSW)
Not going to happen.