gopher
Active Member
good luck with that.
don't know the law in WA but over here it's an offence to even hold a mobile phone while driving
Welcome to Just Commodores, a site specifically designed for all people who share the same passion as yourself.
Infringement contesting
- Thread starter HamaTime™
- Start date
good luck with that.
don't know the law in WA but over here it's an offence to even hold a mobile phone while driving
alien
Member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2008
- Messages
- 915
- Reaction score
- 19
- Points
- 18
- Location
- Tullamarine, Vic
- Members Ride
- 03 VY Supercharged 3.8L
In most states it's illegal to hold a mobile phone, yet it's not illegal to hold and use a CB.... go figure 
Yea, there's not really that much chance of contesting that and winning in any circumstances But you can always try, especially if you have a clean driving record. If WA doesn't do a special let you off thing for clean records then you'll have to write a strongly worded letter to the authorities.
Yea, there's not really that much chance of contesting that and winning in any circumstances
But you can always try, especially if you have a clean driving record. If WA doesn't do a special let you off thing for clean records then you'll have to write a strongly worded letter to the authorities.Vt-Brrrlina
vp bt1 gts replica
- Joined
- May 2, 2006
- Messages
- 521
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Perth, Western Aust
- Members Ride
- vp bt1 5.0ltr full GTS kit
hav a look on the back or the bottom of the infringment itll tell you how to contest it.... however the mobile phone thing... if it goes to court trust me they will check you phoen records to make usre u werent texting or making calls at the time of the offence... and not just evidence on ur phone but actual phone company records
HamaTime™
VIP Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2008
- Messages
- 1,807
- Reaction score
- 61
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Melbourne
- Members Ride
- C Class AMG
Red Lights, Mobiles and Seat belts you cannot contest. They are blanket offences and immediate penalties apply. you cannot unless you go to court get off or contest them.
Speeding can only be contested if it's under 10 k's over the limit, then again only if you have a clean record for 2 years. However it's bullshit that you can be booked for doing under 10 k's over the limit. Gun innacuracies added with speedo innacuracies...and generally you can't be watching your speedo 100% of the time anyways otherwise you couldn't see anything that's going on around you.
It doesn't say anywhere that you can't contest P1 rules, however I had exceptional circumstances, and I think it's a bullshit rule so I'm contesting it.
Speeding can only be contested if it's under 10 k's over the limit, then again only if you have a clean record for 2 years. However it's bullshit that you can be booked for doing under 10 k's over the limit. Gun innacuracies added with speedo innacuracies...and generally you can't be watching your speedo 100% of the time anyways otherwise you couldn't see anything that's going on around you.
It doesn't say anywhere that you can't contest P1 rules, however I had exceptional circumstances, and I think it's a bullshit rule so I'm contesting it.
Slippy_Trippy
Unicorn Shepard
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 142
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Melbourne, VIC
- Members Ride
- 1999 VT II Commodore Acclaim
Yeah speeding laws ave become much to strict in the under 10kph zone. 3kph Tolerance, are you kidding??? I've had two different highway speed check points tell me my speedo was wrong, by different amounts. They can't even prove all their gear is accurate let alone the average drivers speedo, but anyhow.
I just contested a $113 for driving on shittylink without a pass. We had added the car online but it didn't go through so we called when we recieved the late toll invoice and they said if you add the car again the toll will be added to the account and fines will be dropped. We add the car and I hear nothing for over a month while I continue using citylink with no additional fines and then BAM! Civic Compliance infringment notice. GAH!
I just contested a $113 for driving on shittylink without a pass. We had added the car online but it didn't go through so we called when we recieved the late toll invoice and they said if you add the car again the toll will be added to the account and fines will be dropped. We add the car and I hear nothing for over a month while I continue using citylink with no additional fines and then BAM! Civic Compliance infringment notice. GAH!
Tsunamix
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2008
- Messages
- 666
- Reaction score
- 32
- Points
- 28
- Members Ride
- VT 2
I challenged a radar fine in Qld.
Basic scenario - me driving a 2.5L 1989 mitsu magna fwd sedan. I was stuck in the left hand lane, a 4wd in front of me slowed to about 20 klicks to trickle around a corner. I went to changed lanes - had to pause as a renault megane same color as my car came flying through, then changed and accelerated. Got done for 72 in a 60.
The LIDAR includes a distance to detected vehicle record.
I turned up at court, the officer stated that he tagged me as I was changing lanes.
Using maps, satellite images and photos of the scene, I pointed out that i change lanes at a distance of approx 330m (give or take 5m) from the LIDAR. The vehicle that he detected was at a distance of 220M from the LIDAR.
Pretty open and shut really.
Also pointed out that he listed in his report that my vehicle colour was Red. It had been repaitned 6 months before had in Metallic silver. I questioned the opfficer about how he identified the vehile he was targetting. he said I targetted the number plate area. noted the plate and color and pulled you over. When asked what color was the vehicle, he said Red. I pointed out that my vehicle was silver.
Supposedly, Identification of the vehicle is the PRIMARY concern in tehse circumstances. I had my defence prepared by a police prosecutor mate. Should have been open and shut. By law, the magistrate cannot rule agaisnt me if there is even the slighest doubt about the situation.
Except Magistrates are wankers. He ruled against me. Would not allow documentation from substantiating sources in court, ruled that google satellite images and scales are not accurate, and insisted I do my testimony from memory. Of course, the officer was allowed his notes and reports. I was not allowed to present the documents I presented to the traffic superintendent when arranging the challenge as "they are not part of this proceeding". I argued with him about that saying that this is indeed the proceedings, as they relate to the alleged offence. He stated that if they were not presented to the clerk of the courts, they were presented to the Dept of Transport, and therefore relate to the fine, not the offence. I slipped up and said you have got to be joking, the Offence is the reason for the existence of the fine, not the other way round, and got shitty and suggested that if I don't take this matter seriously he would take steps to remind me of the seriousness of the offence.
Classic quote "I'm satisfied with the officers statements, and have no doubt that he identified the correct vehicle".
the law is an ass. No let me rephrase that - The law is an ass for letting unqualified, untrained, ex lawyer wannabes sit in the Magistrates seat. Theres a reason they are called magistrates and not Judges.
Basic scenario - me driving a 2.5L 1989 mitsu magna fwd sedan. I was stuck in the left hand lane, a 4wd in front of me slowed to about 20 klicks to trickle around a corner. I went to changed lanes - had to pause as a renault megane same color as my car came flying through, then changed and accelerated. Got done for 72 in a 60.
The LIDAR includes a distance to detected vehicle record.
I turned up at court, the officer stated that he tagged me as I was changing lanes.
Using maps, satellite images and photos of the scene, I pointed out that i change lanes at a distance of approx 330m (give or take 5m) from the LIDAR. The vehicle that he detected was at a distance of 220M from the LIDAR.
Pretty open and shut really.
Also pointed out that he listed in his report that my vehicle colour was Red. It had been repaitned 6 months before had in Metallic silver. I questioned the opfficer about how he identified the vehile he was targetting. he said I targetted the number plate area. noted the plate and color and pulled you over. When asked what color was the vehicle, he said Red. I pointed out that my vehicle was silver.
Supposedly, Identification of the vehicle is the PRIMARY concern in tehse circumstances. I had my defence prepared by a police prosecutor mate. Should have been open and shut. By law, the magistrate cannot rule agaisnt me if there is even the slighest doubt about the situation.
Except Magistrates are wankers. He ruled against me. Would not allow documentation from substantiating sources in court, ruled that google satellite images and scales are not accurate, and insisted I do my testimony from memory. Of course, the officer was allowed his notes and reports. I was not allowed to present the documents I presented to the traffic superintendent when arranging the challenge as "they are not part of this proceeding". I argued with him about that saying that this is indeed the proceedings, as they relate to the alleged offence. He stated that if they were not presented to the clerk of the courts, they were presented to the Dept of Transport, and therefore relate to the fine, not the offence. I slipped up and said you have got to be joking, the Offence is the reason for the existence of the fine, not the other way round, and got shitty and suggested that if I don't take this matter seriously he would take steps to remind me of the seriousness of the offence.
Classic quote "I'm satisfied with the officers statements, and have no doubt that he identified the correct vehicle".
the law is an ass. No let me rephrase that - The law is an ass for letting unqualified, untrained, ex lawyer wannabes sit in the Magistrates seat. Theres a reason they are called magistrates and not Judges.
SV62NV
Scuba Steve
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2009
- Messages
- 253
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 0
- Location
- Kurunjang
- Members Ride
- MY09 VE SV6
theres a speedo detector above this hill and it ofcourse measures your speed and if you are going to fast it flashes 'TOO FAST SLOW DOWN'.... i was the only one there and did like 50km in a 100km zone and it goes 'TOO FAST SLOW DOWN'...
You want me to walk past it or something? :bang:
You want me to walk past it or something? :bang:
Reaper
Tells it like it is.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2004
- Messages
- 6,493
- Reaction score
- 11,502
- Points
- 113
- Location
- SE Suburbs, Melbourne
- Members Ride
- RG Z71 Colorado, 120 Prado , VDJ200, Vantage
How many people did you have in the car??? I would have thought that was easy to prove/disprove one way or the other. Short of somebody holding a gun to your head, excuses don't get you off most of the time. The magistrate will want to see evidence demonstrating your innocence.
Reaper
vlv8vic
<---Brad Quaid = internet stalker
So were you or weren't you breaking the law? isn't it fairly easy to tell if there were more than the allowed number of passengers in the car? It's not like you are fighting the difference between 100kmh and 104kmh.
They aren't going to read letters all day. If you didn't change their mind in one letter then they won't take the time to read more of them trying to convince them of the same thing. Do it once and do it properly. Post up the letter and I'm sure we'll work out why they didn't like it.
If now you still think you weren't doing the wrong thing seek legal advice.
They wouldn't bother with the phone anyway. Either way it doesn't matter one iota. You can't hold one so records equate to diddly squat.
I've contested a speeding fine on behalf of my partner and she got off. It just wasn't possible given the circumstances that she were doing the claimed speed. A well written letter was all it took. Likewise a bogus insurance claim and fair but wrong parking fine.