Rick (16-05-18),VroomVroom (17-05-18)
Last week I received a Speeding Traffic Infringement Notice in the mail ...in a 100km/hr section of road ...clocked at 108 kms booked at 104 kms - 1 demerit point $198 fine.
The "location" is stated in an area with dual carriageway approximately 5 km in length... described as "between X and Y roads" - this section of road has no where one can stop and place a fixed camera (even in a car) without seriously obstructing main traffic flows
Downloaded the picture and notice that it was taken at 6.38 pm at night... totally pitch black, my number plates just discernible.
I am curious as to how this speed could have been recorded and with a picture taken...
Obviously this is disappointing for me, I am not disputing that I may have gone over the limit and that is against road rules, of course this was not intentional, it may have been possible that I was overtaking another car that was locking me out of being able to get into the left lane... including possibly being tail gated by someone behind me at the same time.
Thoughts anyone?
Rick (16-05-18),VroomVroom (17-05-18)
Look Here -> |
Was their 2 vehicles in the same pic?
If you hadn't been fined for some time, a low range speed offence like this would be pardoned in Vic, not sure where you are
If u want to go on an expedition get a Land Rover, if u want to come home from an expedition get a Landcruiser!
As far as I can see I do not notice any other cars in the pic
I have a gut feeling this was a mobile camera job, I may have been passing this guy while I was travelling on the right lane and he has got me when I have gradually passing him, touch and go with that speed honestly with the needle throttle etc
Yes I am in Vic and at the moment record is good with no demerit points, so I will try apply to have a warning applied instead
If the pic was taken from up high then its from a fixed speed camera, down low, mobile.
You can request a pardon if less than 10 over and no other recent speeding history.
Yes it does work, they do pardon drivers.....
I'm really surprised you wernt just issued a caution notice, I would dispute the fine if you havent had any warnings or cautions regarding speeding in the past 12 months? In Tassi they allow a 4Kmh over the limit, so if it was your detected speed of 108 that brings in back to 104kmh, hence the reason for your fine. I would also ask the location of the camera and a recent calibration report.
checkitout (02-07-18)
Each State varies not only their procedures but in how they set their limits.
At one time in NSW it was 'acceptable to be a few K's over the limit but this lost them too much money so now its 'Zero Tolerance'.
As for the placement of the Camera, this depends if it was set up by the Police or a Private contractor.
When these 'Contractors' started out, they would park anywhere they liked until it was found they had no rights to park on Median Strips, Footpaths and other non vehicle areas so now its always where any one can park.
If the devise is 'Hand Held', it literally can be used anywhere except where it would be considered hazardous to the operator to do so.
A sign must be displayed where a mobile devise is in use but who ever wrote the Rules neglected to say WHERE the sign had to be placed in relation to the Radar unit,, strange eh??
As far as I am concerned, the only reason they use the signs is to stop the claim that these devises are purely Revenue Raisers (which they are) and not to reduce the Road Toll.
I wonder how many are aware of the 'Three Strikes' you get when hit with a penalty in NSW, First is a Loss of Points, 2nd is the Fine and THIRDLY is an increase of $50 a Year for 2 years on your CTP insurance???
I dont know if the other States do this as well.
Last edited by gordon_s1942; 16-05-18 at 03:01 PM.
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say , I just dont ever remember saying it !!
Godzilla (16-05-18)
NO, I saw that on a Doco where the Police in Victoria set up a Radar Trap and hid behind a camouflage net and wore Jungle Makeup and clothing.............
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say , I just dont ever remember saying it !!
I get very tired of reading complaints such as that aired here.
If you don't want to be detected and prosecuted, don't break the law.
If you claim that you didn't notice your speed, pay more attention to your driving.
If an exam result is 2% below that required to pass, you've failed.
Simple.
Grow up!
no warning signs required in QLD either , just a late model car parked on the side of the road..
did they make you pay to get the photo?
They do have warning signs in Tas - fixed signs in random locations on main roads that have nothing to do with where the actual mobile or fixed radar/laser equipment is operating at any particular time. It's just a courtesy reminder and probably the result of RACT lobbying when the speed cams were introduced.
There are no big warning signs like NSW had when nearing fixed cameras 'heavy fines, loss of license etc'. The state likes the element of surprise >
I'm not sure if they have them yet (if they haven't don't read this porkop it might give you ideas). Do the constabulary have cameras mounted in their cars that can photograph you speeding if they are mobile?
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
All cars in NSW are fitted with Camera's for both Mobile and Stationary speed detection as well as testing for Alcohol and Drugs.
I think they still have to do a second test on an Alcometer with in ONE Hour of the 'Blow or Talk' roadside test, Drugs I have no idea.
I am sure once the other States see how much NSW is raking in to spend the money fitting out their vehicles too.
PS, I think they also have 'Number Plate' detection equipment fitted as well.
I am surprised this system hasnt been taken up by local Councils to patrol the marked Parking areas in their towns.
Orange NSW spent $80,000 setting up a vehicle and with great fanfare, began patrolling the streets and I thought they may possibly 'lend' it out to other Councils but it seems to have 'disappeared'.....
Last edited by gordon_s1942; 17-05-18 at 01:31 PM.
I stand unequivicably behind everything I say , I just dont ever remember saying it !!
That's what I thought Rick. Perhaps there is a personal experience in tristens past which would be understandable.
Seems that selective law breaking is OK SOMETIMES however, like links to pirate software, but that's another story.
Look, do the speed limit, but don't spend your time watching the speedo in a desperate attempt not to get booked and fined. Watch the f*cking road!!! Then there are reports (every day) of inaccurate cameras being left in service.
I speed a little, regularly...always have. I regard an occasional fine and points loss as the price as the law is the law. I don't whine about it and just chalk it up to experience. Yes, it's legally wrong, but it is what it is.
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
Rick (17-05-18)
@enf. I agree. I seem to get a speeding ticket on average every 2 to 3 years. Sometimes I think it wasn't justified on the occasion but then I think of how many times I must have exceeded the limit and not been caught, and accept it. It is one of the hazards of driving. As you point out, a driver watching the speedo obsessively is not concentrating on the road. You can be doing 80 in a 60 zone easily enough if you are in an unfamiliar area and don't see a sign.
The problem is of course that we are only human but liable to be fined if our driving is less than perfect. I wonder how Governments will replace the revenue when cars are self-driving?
DB44 (17-05-18)
The picture is down low ...and it is pitch dark, obviously mobile - given the very low tolerances here there is also suspicion with calibration of equipment as well - how about given a factor off for that ?
I am not disputing that I will have gone over the limit, with tolerances this tight it is very easy to go over.
If I was driving significantly over and what is truly a danger to myself and others I would not post. I sense this is simply revenue raising here by contractors and the government here.
They’ve already included the calibration tolerance - detected at 108km/h, issued at 104km/h.
I’d suggest the actually tolerance would be less than +/- 1km/h, but they give you 4km/h.
Not suggesting 108km/h was necessarily dangerous at the time, but it is an amount that would be enough over 100km/h on a cars speedo to be clearly visible to a driver. In most cars, given the in built tolerance, the speedo would likely be displaying between 110-115km/h.
Nobody likes paying a speeding fine, but if one argues ‘revenue raising’, at what speed does a monetary amount become legitimate? Surely, unless the speed limit for the road is grossly low (which isn’t the case on a 100km/h motorway), then the posted speed limit is that threshold?
Bookmarks