Vic Speeding Laws Challenged

[AWD Chaser]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mot...-1225866984157

MOTORISTS caught on camera a fraction over the speed limit could be refunded fines and reimbursed demerit points should a legal challenge by a respected traffic cop succeed.
Moorabbin traffic management unit Sen-Constable Trevor Bergman is fighting a speeding ticket he received in 2003 for travelling 54km/h in a 50km/h zone in his pre-1980 car, arguing his speedometer was inaccurate and the tolerance allowed by Victoria Police was different to that allowed by Australian Design Standards.
Sen-Constable Bergman refused to discuss the matter, but the Herald Sun understands he is concerned at the number of motorists being fined under similar circumstances.
Almost 1.4 million motorists were snapped by traffic cameras in Victoria last year, with drivers fined more than $239 million.
Former traffic chief superintendent David Axup, who wrote the policy for speed cameras on their introduction to Victoria, said Sen-Constable Bergman was challenging the ability of state legislation to override Commonwealth legislation at the time of the offence.
"The argument is the Commonwealth legislation brought in the Australian Design Rules, which at the time Trevor was booked allowed for a 10 per cent tolerance in speedometers, and to enforce limits inside that 10 per cent was contrary to the intention of the Commonwealth law," Mr Axup explained.
Lawyer David Galbally, QC, said a successful challenge would open the floodgates to claims from affected motorists.
"I know of instances where there is a real, live issue as to the fact that manufacturing standards and tolerance standards set by the Federal Government are different to those set by the speed cameras," he said.
"It needs to be looked at by a court. I would have thought that this issue should have been looked at by government or whatever statutory body that is charged with this, and they ought to take that into account.
"The failure to take this into account or give it any form of consideration indicates to me that speed cameras are merely a revenue-raising exercise.
"It's grossly unfair and there would be a lot of people who would not have the slightest clue their speedo is out."
Sources suggest that Sen-Constable Bergman has plenty of support within police traffic ranks.

[Jim Goose]

Umm... and this is something new?

The 10% ADR allowable error rate was/ has been known and is public knowledge.
If your dumb enough to pay a fine that is within 10% error rate then your a fool.

The fact that its so news worthy is because a Police officer is challenging his fine.
Its his legal right (and any other motorist out there) to do so.

[barra265t]

Finally a 'top traffic cop' who has a brain and not a cog in a machine called politics. Sharp contrast with Ken Lay's ludicrous words: "..I was very lucky - I didn't drift into a tree, I got snapped (by a speed camera)." when he was nabbed last year. Haha what joke, one would certainly question Ken Lay's driving ability and common sense or both.

Sen-Constable Bergman deserves a medal and a pat on the back. A good break-away from the 'conformist' attitude Australians have allowed themselves to fall into over the last 10-15 years, all in the name of 'road safety' aka 'revenue raising'.

[bdave351]

Hopefully the QC can win this one his and all drivers in VIC behalf..... before I have to drive down there next month and go crossed eyed watching my speedo again!

[RG]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Umm... and this is something new?

The 10% ADR allowable error rate was/ has been known and is public knowledge.
If your dumb enough to pay a fine that is within 10% error rate then your a fool.

The fact that its so news worthy is because a Police officer is challenging his fine.
Its his legal right (and any other motorist out there) to do so.

Yeah, it'd be a really good idea to not pay a fine on that basis. It costs more to challenge it so is therefore not an option for most people.

[flappist]

This will be very interesting. Like the current "bank fee" class action, the excessive money grabs of the last 10 years or so are finally being challenged.

Should the court rule against the Victorian Government it may lead to a class action that could cost billions of dollars and hopefully set a precedent for future "stealth taxes".

For too long have we been swindled by public service bullies who have long forgotten that they are paid to serve the people not the other way round.

[xr6fa]

He would have been 57kph they deduct 3kph

[Sorted]

And if the government wanted you to know if your speedo was out they would have more of those over head speed displays that tell you what actual speed your doing ..... There is only two of these over head speed displays around Melbourne - one on the way back from Geelong to Melbourne and the other on the way back from Heathcote to Melbourne on the Hume....

They can put up 100's of cameras but can only put up two sets of these over head speed displays, pretty easy to see why....

[RG]

Originally Posted by Sorted

And if the government wanted you to know if your speedo was out they would have more of those over head speed displays that tell you what actual speed your doing ..... There is only two of these over head speed displays around Melbourne - one on the way back from Geelong to Melbourne and the other on the way back from Heathcote to Melbourne on the Hume....

They can put up 100's of cameras but can only put up two sets of these over head speed displays, pretty easy to see why....

You forgot the one in Ballan that occasionally works.

[mik]

speaking of the overhead speed signs i checked one with my gps a few weeks ago and it was out a couple of kph(what a surprise).

[Gaz]

Originally Posted by xr6fa

He would have been 57kph they deduct 3kph

They may offer that excuse as a leeway, but I'd say the fact is they accuse you of doing x km/h - when making such an accusation I'd say they would have to accurately represent the speed you were travelling.

Anyhow, the follow on consequences, 100km/h would allow 110 on old speedo's - they will still book you at 107 taking off 3km/h.

[Burnout]

Originally Posted by flappist

This will be very interesting. Like the current "bank fee" class action, the excessive money grabs of the last 10 years or so are finally being challenged.

Should the court rule against the Victorian Government it may lead to a class action that could cost billions of dollars and hopefully set a precedent for future "stealth taxes".

For too long have we been swindled by public service bullies who have long forgotten that they are paid to serve the people not the other way round.

Agreed, this could be one of a few cases of railing against the machine of the erosion of the individuals rights by stealth.

[Pinkbits]

Originally Posted by RG

You forgot the one in Ballan that occasionally works.

And the one on the western side of Ballarat.
What is the point of these "indicators" if half the time they are not working?

My work vehicle is '09 Nissan Navara dual cab 4WD. I have complained to Nissan at the last 2 services that the speedo reads incorrectly (exactly 10km/h below) from 50km/h right through to 110km/h. The reply i got was "at least you won't get a ticket" to which i suggested that he drive it for a week and every time you check the speedo you have to remember that it is reading 10km/h under & see how annoyed you get. They also said it was within ADR, which i thought was +/- 10% not 10km/h.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by xr6fa

He would have been 57kph they deduct 3kph

3KPH is not 10% of 57kph.
If they are not removing 10% from the orginal speed then he wins hands down.
If they removed 10% from his speed the issued ticket would be for 51kmh!
1km over the speed limit.

There wouldnt be a cop in the country who would issue a ticket from 1km over the speed limit, not if they had any brains.

[EDManual]

I have a new Hyundai Elantra, it has a perfectly accurate odometer, but the speedo is about 5 to 6% out. Ie reads 94 or 95 when doing 100 by gps or highway checker.

I put on bigger higher profile tyres, now my speedo is dead on accurate, but my odometer is 5 to 6% out, Ie it says I have done 100, but I have actually done 106km.

The car companies can obviously make the speedos accurate if they want, but dont for some reason. One reason I think is for the deliberate problem with the odometer accerate and speedo inaccurate I have in my car is that you end up with better fuel economy/speed as you think you are driving faster than you are!! (But you dont in actual fact of course)

[Jason[98.EL]]

i have a fine here that states

The alleged speed is 3km/h less than the detected speed or 3% less if over 100km/h

oh yes I got pinged for doing a detected speed of 68km/h and Alleged speed of 65km/h
a $146.00 fine with 1 demerit point

I am not happy but what can you do this is the first fine in about 4 yrs for me lol

Jason

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Burnout

Agreed, this could be one of a few cases of railing against the machine of the erosion of the individuals rights by stealth.

It will not be a court battle, it was be an all out war. Beside the potential loss of both incumbent and future revenue from "safety tax cameras" there is the possibility of a precedent being set that may apply to many other areas.

The government and public service apparatchiks have a lot to lose and will try every dirty trick in the book to stall or derail this case.

Up here in sunny QLD any attempt to fight a speed camera ticket puts you on a hiding to nothing as they always bring in expert witnesses from all over the world and you will get stung with $5000 to $10000 court costs when you ARE found guilty (as speed cameras are never wrong).

As I stated above, this will be very interesting.

[Warrenk]

For all you bush lawyers here is a link to Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 18/03 - Instrumentation) 2006. This is the ADR for the speedo. If you want to attempt to work out the tolerance go to paragraph 5.3.

Warren

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Warrenk

For all you bush lawyers here is a link to Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 18/03 - Instrumentation) 2006. This is the ADR for the speedo. If you want to attempt to work out the tolerance go to paragraph 5.3.

Warren

Yes, this edition was updated to reflect Australia's ongoing UNECE harmonisation effort. (We adopted the UNECE rule in totality).

The variables were greater/different before that edition. Officer will be relying on that aspect, and if he is willing to take this to the High Court and to also use national metrology, then he should well win.

NB - The sooner we are rid of much of the ADR process, in favour of simply adopting the full UNECE rule for each item as an 'automatic legislative instrument', the better. Save $$$, especially with lighting (ADR's variable, plus 13 and 19 et al - Aussie created basket case of really 'dumb' domestic requirement, = uber duh). Leave it to the world experts Canberra and Industry, and save the country bucks, including through crash reduction.

[FPV8U]

Hopefully something comes of this Rules tighter than ADR requirements is a double standard if we have ever seen it, best of luck to all of those involved Bar the Victorian Government.

[stoopsrolly]

when in doubt just say you sneezed and didnt see the change in speed sign
that ought to cover your ***
the new rules they pulled out there *** up here in qld the other day was "If your driving along the highway and the speed changes down to 80 for roadworks that is the limit for that area (agreed) but if you come onto that same highway after the sign and get caught doing 100 you still get the fine because you should know there is a sign back 200mtrs before you entered the highway"
tell me this isnt **************** revenue raising

[82XD393.3v]

my understanding is that if there is a difference in the speedo to actual speed the speedo isnt allowed to read less than actual speed could be wrong but im sure design rules allow tollerence but speedo carnt read less than actual speed there for if you get pinged speedo carnt be used as an excuse

[arm79]

Originally Posted by stoopsrolly

the new rules they pulled out there *** up here in qld the other day was "If your driving along the highway and the speed changes down to 80 for roadworks that is the limit for that area (agreed) but if you come onto that same highway after the sign and get caught doing 100 you still get the fine because you should know there is a sign back 200mtrs before you entered the highway"

How is that new?

I always thought the law was "if you pull into a street or road and dont see a speed sign, you automatically assume the speed that is the lowest default speed for that state".

Stupid rule I know, and no one adheres to it, but it is the rule.

Unfortunately ignorance is no excuse to defy the laws.

[Full Noise]

My guess is that the copper will not succeed, although, I’d really like him to. The political pressure on this case would be overwhelming, even though the “law” should not have any political influence. It would just about send the state government broke and in an election year, it’s not a good look.

As Flappist pointed out, the government will pull out every dirty trick in the book to discredit this police officer. He may also be feeling the “heat” from force command as well.

So if he wins, the government will appeal and this police officer will eventually need to find another job.

If he loses, he’ll probably still have to find another job, it just might take a bit longer to force him out.

[Jim Goose]

The variables were greater/different before that edition. Officer will be relying on that aspect, and if he is willing to take this to the High Court and to also use national metrology, then he should well win.

Its called the grand father clause.
New rules and laws are seldon retrospective.
Thats why an XR falcon with no rear seat belts is legal.

A car made prior to any ADR/ law changes remains legal because of this.
If the officers car is an old car he has no dramas.

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

There wouldnt be a cop in the country who would issue a ticket from 1km over the speed limit, not if they had any brains.

Not true. I know a guy who got fined for this in his old rally car.

He wouldn't admit to doing anything that the traffic cop suspected him of doing so they wrote him up for 1kmh over the limit as a way of needling him.......it worked.

[LTDHO]

Do you really think this will go anywhere?

Copper from same TMU tried to fight a red light camera and lost.

Governmet will spend $10,000's on this to win, as they have more to loose. Copper wont.

[phillyc]

The law is draconian. The singular focus on speed is to the detriment of real traffic policing which would save more lives and improve driver behaviour.

I hope the copper wins but isn't sent broke in the process.

[chevypower]

The whole system is corrupt. A company develops the systems to make money. It entices the government to implement the system through no upfront costs, and they share profits. Technicians and operators do it for the same reason. To make money. They like where it's going, so they put more of them in, lower speed limits and tolerances.... to make money.

I am pretty sure we all think that traffic violations should be managed by the police with no financial incentives. But that is just way too much to ask for.

[GT-E]

I was told that in Victoria they changed the rules and introduced a "traffic court" that was exempt from ADR's and common consitutional law. This stopped many people from having a hope in hell of winning any speed related case.
In NSW you just go to the local court and can get a happy/angry magistrate who can make or break your day in court.