Red P-Plate (P1) Caught Speeding Twice in a Week, What to Do?

skimp on 05/09/2023 - 13:17
Last edited 05/09/2023 - 13:33 by 1 other user

My friend's daughter was caught by a camera for exceeding under 10km/h. In NSW it is an automatic 3-month suspension for a P1 holder.

Before even receiving her first fine she was caught by a camera again for exceeding under 10km/h, this time in a school zone. The fines were issued to her parents since it was their cars. They have nominated her as the offender for the first fine but are hesitating about nominating her for the second, depending if the suspensions will be served consecutively or concurrently.

Does anyone know the answer?

Automotive

Comments

    • Kangal on 06/09/2023 - 00:12
      +36

      I'm young, I can do the time, thanks for encouraging me to do the crime :D

      • ausdday on 06/09/2023 - 10:57
        +9

        remember, if it's not right, do it at night.

      • LFO on 06/09/2023 - 11:32

        And maybe young enough to get Scot free after all :-)

      • bmerigan on 06/09/2023 - 22:17

        Speed on small back roads only. They'll always catch you on the major roads.

    • TrumpisKing on 06/09/2023 - 07:56
      -4

      Dumbest quote 🤡

      • Chandler on 06/09/2023 - 08:57
        +1

        Dumbest quote 🤡

        Would you still be saying that if OP's friend's daughter hit a school-kid?

        for exceeding under 10km/h, this time in a school zone

        • bmerigan on 06/09/2023 - 22:18
          -5

          Brainwashed if you think that her 7kmh is more dangerous thqn a multitude of other possible scenarios.

          • callum9999 on 07/09/2023 - 11:24
            +4

            @bmerigan: As insightful as your comment is, you'll need to expand on how exactly listening to common sense medical science is "brainwashing", and what scenarios are more dangerous yet allowed.

            • Chandler on 07/09/2023 - 12:04
              +1

              @callum9999: My opinion is contrary to theirs, so I've obviously been brainwashed by someone. Probably Dictator Dan…

            • Sxio on 07/09/2023 - 13:00
              +2

              @callum9999: How is it a medical science issue???

              • callum9999 on 07/09/2023 - 19:27
                +2

                @Sxio: I was trying to think of a better way to phrase it, but there are numerous scientific studies analysing the impact of collisions with children/people that show a small difference in speed can be the difference between serious injury/death and minor injury.

                Maybe "medical science" isn't perfect, but I think it's close enough!

                • Chandler on 08/09/2023 - 09:49
                  +1

                  @callum9999: It's not just the difference between serious injury/death and minor injury - it's also the difference between a collision and no-collision. Higher speed = longer braking distance. So add understanding physics to that list.

          • Chandler on 07/09/2023 - 12:03
            +2

            @bmerigan: Well, after you've been hit by a car going 47km/h, then we can talk about how that is so much better than a multitude of other possible scenarios, such as OP's friend's daughter being late to the movies (or whatever they were speeding towards)

            • bmerigan on 07/09/2023 - 12:39
              -1

              @Chandler: For example modern car driving at 47 vs b-double semi at 40.

              • Chandler on 07/09/2023 - 13:24
                +7

                @bmerigan: And? Whilst your argument has merit, at the end of the day we have speed limits, and OP's friend's daughter failed to follow them. Much like Marquis de Gramont discovered for himself, not following the rules has consequences.

                So we should remove speed limits entirely and trust vehicle operators to drive suitably to the conditions? Where do I hand in my license, because I do not want to be on/near the road in that case! Think about the "average" Australian, and consider the fact that almost half of the population is less intelligent than that…

                Or is it that people should be able to argue that whilst yes, they did break the rules, but as there were no consequences to others for their rule breaking they should go unpunished? Surely you can see why that is a bad argument…

                Or is it that the rules should only apply to particular portions of the population, say in this case those in modern cars should be able to drive faster? So now the socio-economically disadvantaged need to spend more time transiting since their "old" car doesn't meet the the requirements to go 50km/h instead of 40km/h? Are we also checking that the cars are well maintained? How are speed limits enforced now? Is it that you get pulled over for speeding, cop goes "Oh, you've got a modern car? And it's well maintained? Carry on then, ol' chap!" and you go on your way? Enjoy getting pulled over every time! How much faster can "new" cars go? Is it a set difference, or are we changing all the signs to show dual limits? In light of this, go see my comment above about the average Australian…

  • MS Paint on 05/09/2023 - 13:19
    +160

    Does anyone know the answer?

    Ummm. Don't speed?

    • DashCam AKA Rolts on 05/09/2023 - 13:42
      +21

      That definitely makes sense. Cheers.

    • Jimothy Wongingtons on 05/09/2023 - 13:49
      +10

      Get out of here with logic and common sense.

      This makes sense, cheers.

    • Malik Nasser on 05/09/2023 - 14:17
      +26

      Option 1: Don't speed
      Option 2: Don't get caught speeding

      • Mechz on 05/09/2023 - 14:24
        +3

        I prefer them the other way around.

        • nigel deborah on 06/09/2023 - 13:06
          +1

          Do you also prefer hit and run to rendering assistance, as long as you don't get caught?

          • Save 50 Cent on 06/09/2023 - 14:18
            +2

            @nigel deborah: That escalated quickly.

            • nigel deborah on 06/09/2023 - 14:31
              -1

              @Save 50 Cent: Just trying to point out that speeding, generally, risks the lives of other road users and shouldn't be done just because you think you won't get caught

          • Mechz on 06/09/2023 - 19:25
            -1

            @nigel deborah: Is this a Pulp Fiction scenario or do you just like to wander across the road without looking?

      • Sinnerator on 08/09/2023 - 08:16

        Option 3: be rich, set up company, register car in company name, pay 5x fine$amount but without points loss
        <is this still a thing or did govt get rid of it?>

    • 87percent on 05/09/2023 - 14:26
      +12

      Especially in a school zone

    • RTX9090Ti on 06/09/2023 - 13:50

      Don't drive, take a bus or train.

    • bmerigan on 06/09/2023 - 22:19
      -1

      Answered the wrong question though. Comprehension fail.

    • LeonC on 19/09/2023 - 10:59

      Police hate this one simple trick!

  • GG57 on 05/09/2023 - 13:26
    +83

    …Caught Speeding Twice in a Week, What to Do?

    Hand in that license.
    They either can't control a vehicle, or are negligent whilst driving, or intentionally exceeded the limit. Walking for 3 months should sort that out.

    • Jazstar on 06/09/2023 - 14:07
      +4

      I recently saw a p plater in a fancy European car (parents likely bought them) speeding and texting and almost hit me. Maybe it was this person and they need to be off the road for a while.

      • illusion99 on 09/09/2023 - 11:01

        Not just limited to p platers who do this and not just fancy European cars.

    • kabammi on 06/09/2023 - 15:14

      I'm wondering - are there any studies that show that sin-bin time will change their behaviour?

      • GG57 on 06/09/2023 - 15:21
        +4

        I don't know.
        I do know that when I have been penalised or suffered as a result of my own actions, I change my behaviours accordingly. I would have thought most people are similar?
        Of course, I do take responsibility for my own actions, unlike some others.

      • dbmitch on 07/09/2023 - 01:09
        +3

        While Im not sure of any studies of that sort, I DO know that if said persons are off the road after handing in their licenses, I know at least I am safe during their sin bin time.

    • TrollingYa on 08/09/2023 - 01:02

      Hopefully you feel the same way towards people who get pinged for sitting in the right lane on the freeway, or failing to indicate at a round-about.

  • sumyungguy on 05/09/2023 - 13:31
    +78

    Having publicly posted the fraud they're about to commit, the answer is now crystal clear.

  • SydStrand on 05/09/2023 - 13:34
    +19

    Does she actually NEED the car, i.e., go to work? If not, tough luck. If 'your friends' bail her out, what sort of message will that teach her for the future?

    • blitz on 05/09/2023 - 15:53
      +30

      Does she actually NEED the car

      But how else is she going to speed?

      • FezMonkey on 05/09/2023 - 16:20
        +8

        Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children of OP's friends?

    • TimApple on 06/09/2023 - 17:23
      +2

      This is what public transport is for.

  • GordonD on 05/09/2023 - 13:35
    +58

    So, do I understand OP's question correctly.

    After her committing two relatively minor traffic offences, rather than it being clear what message responsible parents should be giving her, they want to know whether they should join her in a conspiracy to commit a serious criminal offence?

    • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 11:43
      +9

      Failure to nominate is not a criminal offense at all, certainly not a serious criminal offence.

      It is a traffic offense though and there are substantial fines.

      • Euphemistic on 06/09/2023 - 11:49
        +3

        There’s a difference between failure to nominate and nominating a driver that wasn’t driving. The latter would be fraudulent.

        • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 11:56
          -5

          False nomination is not fraud either, also just a traffic offence.

          • Euphemistic on 06/09/2023 - 12:09
            +2

            @trapper: While it may not meet the legal definition of being ‘fraud’ nominating a person that wasn’t driving is fraudulent activity. Not nominating by omission is negligent activity.

          • brad1-8tsi on 06/09/2023 - 14:08

            @trapper:

            False nomination is not fraud either, also just a traffic offence.

            They use the word "crime" & "fraudulent" a few times in this article. Maybe they haven't a clue?

            https://lylawyers.com.au/nominating-driver-nsw/

            • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 15:49
              +2

              @brad1-8tsi: A false statutory declaration is a crime.

              But a statutory declaration is not required to nominate another driver.

              You would only be asked to provide a statutory declaration if the person you nominated denied responsibility etc and things needed to be taken further.

          • Psdsoft on 06/09/2023 - 14:08

            @trapper: Tell that to the NSW Supreme Court judge who went to jail for nominating someone else for speeding.

            • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 15:55
              +1

              @Psdsoft: He made false statements under oath. That is perjury, which is a crime.

          • trapper on 08/09/2023 - 11:53

            @trapper: So weird so many people downvote a factually correct comment. I didn't write the laws lol

      • Baysew on 06/09/2023 - 14:38
        +4

        Marcus Einfeld

        In 2006, Einfeld was issued a A$77 speeding ticket for travelling 10 km/h (6.2 mph) over the limit. He appealed the ticket, claiming that he had not been driving. Journalists subsequently discovered that he had made a number of false statements under oath; the woman he had said was driving had in fact died several years earlier. Einfeld was arrested in 2007, and the following year pleaded guilty to perjury and perverting the course of justice. He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. As a result of his actions, Einfeld was expelled from the legal profession and stripped of many of the honours he had previously accumulated, including his status as a Queen's Counsel, appointment of the Order of Australia, and his status as a National Living Treasure.

        • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 15:53
          +1

          he had made a number of false statements under oath

          Yes, perjury is a crime. Do not lie under oath.

        • bmerigan on 06/09/2023 - 22:21
          +2

          Wow prices have really gone up!

  • [Deactivated] on 05/09/2023 - 13:37
    +99

    A proper parent would nominate her for both to teach her the proper lesson that she shouldn't speed.
    not the lesson that her parents will be there to cover for her and thus enabling her bad decision making.

    • Almost Banned on 05/09/2023 - 17:53
      +14

      ^^^ This.,
      If she is old enough to have a driver's licence, she is old enough to wear the consequences of her actions.

      • Jazstar on 06/09/2023 - 14:09
        +1

        Exactly. Enabling bad behaviour is a recipe for them to end up in much more serious trouble later.

        • rompastompa on 06/09/2023 - 15:41

          Agreed. Encouraging negative conduct sets the stage for them to find themselves in far graver circumstances down the road.

    • DiscountForThee on 06/09/2023 - 00:19
      +2

      100% this. They're also at the age where they are the least impacted by not having access to driving so this is the best time for them to learn

    • Protractor on 08/09/2023 - 14:57

      Most 'proper' parents aren't

    • congo on 08/09/2023 - 20:30

      Well said. 100% agreed.

  • brownsound on 05/09/2023 - 13:38
    +6

    slow doon

  • cashless on 05/09/2023 - 13:41
    +13

    Send your friend’s daughter back to driving school

    • mountaineer on 05/09/2023 - 19:41
      +1

      Send your friend’s daughter back to driving school

      • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 06/09/2023 - 07:40
        +4

        Send your friend’s daughter back to driving school

        • Iwantthatbargain on 08/09/2023 - 06:40

          Send your friend’s daughter back to driving school

  • DashCam AKA Rolts on 05/09/2023 - 13:43
    +9

    Get her a PT timetable.

  • grimace3 on 05/09/2023 - 13:44
    +3

    Yeah, don't speed in school zones!

    exceeding under 10km/h, this time in a school zone

  • foxmulder on 05/09/2023 - 13:47
    +13

    2 penalties in a week, you should get a discount :)

    • goldiep on 05/09/2023 - 23:29
      +1

      I can imagine the reaction from the daughter, posted to her feed on social media:

      Lolz, wtf! I'm on insta, scrolling my DMs. Idk itz school zn. Got fined 2 in a wk. Wtf, lolz!

      • accommodating looking in mirror from behind picture.
      • Assburg on 06/09/2023 - 11:13

        No lolz, only anger on her part I'm sure.

      • tanguyen on 08/09/2023 - 10:06

        This has the same vibe as when a few years ago triple M were trying to send up the style of music young people on tripleJ were listening to and played Smells Like Teen Spirit.

  • c64 on 05/09/2023 - 13:48
    +6

    Does anyone know the answer?

    get a new daughter?

  • skimp on 05/09/2023 - 13:51
    +17

    Ditto to all your sentiments and admonishments, I fully concur. The question is on the application of the law, whether the suspensions will be served consecutively or concurrently?

    • GG57 on 05/09/2023 - 13:58
      +42

      The question is largely irrelevant.
      The driver should serve the penalties as they are applied.

      • sumyungguy on 05/09/2023 - 14:24
        +16

        Agree it's a ridiculous question. Why would anyone be allowed to serve their suspensions concurrently, thereby being awarded a discount for repeated offending within a short timeframe?

        • JimB on 05/09/2023 - 14:39
          +7

          I'm don't agree with it but may serious crimes are served concurrently.

          • sumyungguy on 05/09/2023 - 14:46

            @JimB: But only when arising from the same court hearing.

        • skimp on 05/09/2023 - 15:35
          +19

          “If you have committed multiple traffic offences, you may receive more than one disqualification period. The court will usually allow these disqualification periods to run at the same time.”

          https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/demerit….

          • Chandler on 06/09/2023 - 09:02
            +11

            @skimp: @skimp - here's your answer. You can thank @skimp for finding a proper source of this information.

            • sumyungguy on 06/09/2023 - 09:06
              +2

              @Chandler: Yeah, but that's if you contest both cases in court. I don't think we can figure out (from web searching) what happens if OP's friend pays both fines in the name of the same P1 driver.

            • skimp on 06/09/2023 - 12:56

              @Chandler: That was in reference to disqualifications, not suspensions.

          • Assburg on 06/09/2023 - 11:16

            @skimp: Honestly I'd run it in court just to scare the life out of her, and you'll get the concurrent periods.

            Sure you'll be paying the fine anyway but it's an investment in scaring her out of being a scumbag.

            And, if it doesn't scare her out of the behaviour…well you did everything reasonable you could've.

            • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 12:06
              -1

              @Assburg:

              I'd run it in court just to scare the life out of her. … it's an investment in scaring her out of being a scumbag.

              Jeepers she's not a career criminal lol

              She unknowingly drove barely over the limit twice… a fine and three month suspension will be more than enough to learn her lesson.

              • Assburg on 06/09/2023 - 17:48

                @trapper: Unknowingly driving over the speed limit is probably worse than knowingly driving over it.

                You're far too lenient here, think of how the parents of any children who got cleaned up in an accident might feel.

                Negligently operating heavy machinery is not something our legislature or judiciary look kindly upon, and it's best to inculcate her with that lesson early on. But, given you don't believe it's an issue yourself I guess the apple simply didn't fall far from the tree in this case.

        • trapper on 06/09/2023 - 12:03
          +2

          Why would anyone be allowed to serve their suspensions concurrently

          Mainly because the deterrent effect of the first penalty wasn't yet playing any role when the second incident occurred.

    • bmerigan on 06/09/2023 - 22:24
      +7

      It seems not too many people are interested in answering the actual question when they have the chance to take someone down a peg.

      • skimp on 06/09/2023 - 22:33
        +2

        It's been an interesting experience to read all the responses. There are about 4 useful answers out of about 190 comments (~2%). The upshot is one person actually gave some valuable insights into offence processing so it's been well worth the time.

        • Sinnerator on 08/09/2023 - 08:20

          if you think this is bad, you should try posting this on reddit and see what happens, or even worse….. whirlpool

  • mapax on 05/09/2023 - 13:54
    +5

    Have they started using facial recognition to catch people attempting to commit traffic camera fraud yet?

    • EightImmortals on 05/09/2023 - 17:45
      +1

      London Blade Runners- Aussie chapter.

  • tsunamisurfer on 05/09/2023 - 13:56
    +5

    The answer is lying on a Infringement Declaration is an offence.

    What type of lesson is this teaching the daughter further on in life where she knows her parents can always take the hit for her.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join