[QLD] Red Light Camera Infringment - Worth Appealing?

Lfrumper on 26/10/2019 - 12:28
Last edited 29/10/2019 - 15:41 by 1 other user

Long time lurker, first time poster, be gentle :)

So, early morning heading into the sun with visor blocking the sky on a six lane inner city road. I see a green traffic light on my far left and a clear road ahead and decided to take a right turn into a side road, only to realise, once I had turned, that the visor had been obscuring a red right turn arrow.

I can afford to pay the $400 fine and the 3 points don't threaten my licence, but I didn't knowingly or recklessly do the crime, so I'm wondering if it's worth taking it to court and making the case?

Thanks for any advice you can offer.

Update: thanks all, fine paid, moving on.

Automotive

Comments

  • spackbace on 26/10/2019 - 12:30
    +49

    "Sorry Sir, I was temporarily blinded, lucky I didn't hit a pedestrian hey?!"

    Yeah no, you don't have a defence against the charge, pay up. You putting your own visor in such a way as to block the traffic lights is pretty stupid…

    • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 12:37
      +9

      thanks, the visor was blocking the sun, and the traffic lights were very high because it's a wide road, so i think stupid is a bit harsh, but i take your point.

      • xuqi on 26/10/2019 - 14:04
        +17

        That right up there with; The dog ate my homework.

      • brendanm on 26/10/2019 - 18:10
        -1

        I think stupid is fair if you just coat yourself $400 and 3 points.

      • MrSammyMcG on 28/10/2019 - 10:37
        +9

        Most people on here are a bit harsh. He does have a point but could certainly treat you with some respect. These are the same people that are super quiet IRL and go to the internet to be like that.

        If he's asking politely you can respond politely, calling him an stupid isn't polite.

        • spackbace on 28/10/2019 - 11:07
          +2

          some respect.

          Again, if OP couldn't see what the light was, they very easily could've caused an accident with someone coming the other way. Someone just travelling as per the traffic laws, and expecting that a green light intersection is free to drive into. Stupid is actually an understatement

          There's 3 red turn signal lights on offer. OP missed all 3? Stupid.

      • anonymous01 on 28/10/2019 - 14:38

        Picture it like this, imagine if you accidentally ingest poison because your hand was covering the label on the bottle, will you take Laws of Physics and Biology to court and claim you ingested it accidentally and don't deserve to get sick/die?

        Plus, I know we all make mistakes, but unfortunately a lot of people lie as well. It's hard to tell both apart, so it's easy and simple to apply the same rule to everyone or don't apply any rule to anyone.. we both know the consequences of the latter, so just pay the fine.

  • whooah1979 on 26/10/2019 - 12:35
    +12

    That’s no excuse to run a red light, ever.

    • John Kimble on 26/10/2019 - 17:44
      +3

      To save the universe?

    • abb on 28/10/2019 - 09:21
      +1

      OP's excuse is no good, but there are at least 2 real scenarios where you can:

      if the traffic lights are at an intersection with a left turn on red after stopping sign and the driver is turning left at the intersection, the driver may turn left after stopping.

      http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/rr2014104…

      If a driver is in the path of an approaching police or emergency vehicle that is displaying a flashing blue or red light (whether or not it is also displaying other lights) or sounding an alarm, the driver must move out of the path of the vehicle as soon as the driver can do so safely.
      This rule applies to the driver despite any other rule of these Rules.

      http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/rr2014104…

      • Chandler on 28/10/2019 - 10:00

        Links are for NSW, OP is QLD so may differ slightly (I don't think it does).

        left turn on red after stopping sign

        Very few of those in QLD. They did do a trial a year or so ago and left one or two in.

        • geoffs87 on 28/10/2019 - 10:33

          really? I went to uni on the gold coast (granted that was ~10 years ago), and had a word for them…. TLAT's Turn Left (at) Any Time. Loved em, saved alot of time on our way to Cavil to do lappys.

          Interesting if they're getting rid of them!

        • abb on 28/10/2019 - 11:49

          Links are for NSW, OP is QLD so may differ slightly (I don't think it does).

          Yeah I'm in NSW so I use the NSW pages by default, but like you, I'm under the impression the states are all aligned on traffic laws.

          • ngengerous on 28/10/2019 - 14:34
            +1

            @abb: I wish they didn't differ… I believe in Victoria you can pop u-turns wherever safe, but in QLD you can only perform them at signed intersections.

            • Chandler on 28/10/2019 - 16:48

              @ngengerous: Correct - U-turns at traffic lights are only permitted where signed with "U-turn permitted". Un-controlled intersections is a free for all unless otherwise signed or line-marked.

              From https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/road/traffic-lights:

              U-turns

              You can only make a U-turn at traffic lights when there is a U-turn permitted sign. When you are doing a U-turn, you must give way to all other vehicles and pedestrians—even if other vehicles are facing a give way or stop sign.

              At intersections without traffic lights or at breaks in the centre island of the road, you must not do a U-turn if there is a no U-turn sign.

              You must also not do a U-turn:

              • across a single or double continuous centre line
              • across a continuous centre line to the left of a broken line
              • over a painted island in the centre of the road.
          • Chandler on 28/10/2019 - 16:33

            @abb: https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/rules/road/give-way for those wanting to read the QLD rules.

            • abb on 29/10/2019 - 09:33
              +1

              @Chandler: that's not quite the right page. Those summary documents with the pretty pictures don't capture all the actual laws.

              The Qld laws turn out to be equivalent to the NSW ones that I've quoted, they even have the same section numbers.

              if the traffic lights are at an intersection with a left turn on red after stopping sign and the driver is turning left at the intersection, the driver may turn left before the traffic lights change to green or flashing yellow.

              https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current…

              (2)If a driver is in the path of an approaching police vehicle or emergency vehicle that is displaying a flashing blue or red light (whether or not it is also displaying other lights) or sounding an alarm, the driver must move out of the path of the vehicle as soon as the driver can do so safely.
              (3)This section applies to the driver despite any other section of this regulation.

              https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current…

      • trustnoone on 28/10/2019 - 13:47

        If a driver is in the path of an approaching police or emergency vehicle that is displaying a flashing blue or red light (whether or not it is also displaying other lights) or sounding an alarm, the driver must move out of the path of the vehicle as soon as the driver can do so safely.
        This rule applies to the driver despite any other rule of these Rules.

        That's super interesting, I'm almost sure someone said this was not the case once for a red light rule so I'm pretty surprised.

        • omgilia on 28/10/2019 - 15:13

          I remember seeing forum thread here where by appealing they will review the footage again and overrule the infringement in cases of emergency.

          YMMV as this was for NSW

        • [Deactivated] on 07/11/2019 - 18:11

          I know QAS at least specifically asks people not to drive over a red light to clear a path for an ambulance simply because they don't have a lot of faith in road users that it's a safe manoeuvre to make.

  • Baysew on 26/10/2019 - 12:39

    What is the best outcome are you seeking?

    • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 12:40
      +6

      well this is ozbargain, so saving $400 naturally :)

  • Donaldhump on 26/10/2019 - 13:31
    +3

    No

  • pegaxs on 26/10/2019 - 13:34
    +5

    Long time lurker, huh?

    Member Since
    16/11/2013

    Wow, weren't lying…

    first time poster, be gentle :)

    Yeah, that probably wont happen. *grabs popcorn*

    So, early morning heading into the sun with visor blocking the sky on a six lane inner city road. I see a green traffic light on my far left and a clear road ahead and decided to take a right turn into a side road, only to realise, once I had turned, that the visor had been obscuring a red right turn arrow.

    LOL. Pay the fine and be more vigilant with your awareness around intersections while driving.

    I can afford to pay the $400 fine and the 3 points don't threaten my licence

    Then pay it.

    but I didn't knowingly or recklessly do the crime.

    Ignorance of what you are doing isn't really a defence.

    so I'm wondering if it's worth taking it to court and making the case?

    Please do. And use the same defence as above and then report back on your success…

    Thanks for any advice you can offer.

    Better hold onto something, because it's about to come in thick and fast and from some of the biggest idiots to ever grace a keyboard on the internet. Cant wait for this epic, 3 page, festival of the dumbarse to take off.

  • aoeueoa on 26/10/2019 - 13:39
    +6

    With traffic offence you don't have to be reckless of have the intent to be guilty of it. It can be accidental/unintentional.

    Onus is on you to do what is required to see what colour a light is.

    • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 14:09

      well the one i could see before i took the turn across the empty road ahead was green :)

      • stumo on 28/10/2019 - 09:46
        +1

        Green light != green arrow.

        • TerryJustTerry on 28/10/2019 - 12:06

          I've never seen != before is it a coders thing or is it a different way of writing /= ?

          • stumo on 28/10/2019 - 12:16

            @TerryJustTerry: C

          • abb on 29/10/2019 - 09:37
            +1

            @TerryJustTerry: != is a "coder thing".

            /= does something very different in some languages (slash is used to divide).

            Of course, typography geeks would use the unambiguous not-equals sign ≠ ;)

            • TerryJustTerry on 29/10/2019 - 09:47
              +1

              @abb: Ahhh cheers mate, I thought as much I think I just was a little confused as I had never seen that before, although I have used /= before just online to mean not equal ( as I couldn't find the ≠ character :P)

              • abb on 29/10/2019 - 09:49

                @TerryJustTerry: No worries. I did some reading (to find the damn symbol) and discovered that some programming languages actually do use /= for not equal. Madness!

                • TerryJustTerry on 29/10/2019 - 10:02

                  @abb: legend, yeah it makes sense to me, but probably not to people who know /= as divide haha

  • Godric on 26/10/2019 - 13:41
    +2

    No

  • [Deactivated] on 26/10/2019 - 13:51
    +2

    If the sun constitutes exceptional circumstances everyone would use that excuse.

    • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 15:13

      it's wasn't so much "the sun was in my eyes your honour" more only having the arrow lights mounted high overhead and easily be obscured (there was no red right arrow on the left hand side next to the green light).

      • ssquid on 26/10/2019 - 21:11

        Google maps link for the intersection?

  • WTF on 26/10/2019 - 14:09
    +24

    My missus asked me why I did not clean the yard this morning. I told her the sun was in my eyes.

    Be warned. It did not end well for me :(

  • dins on 26/10/2019 - 15:05
    +6

    Mistakes happen. Not sure why some are going after OP must think they are perfect or something. Any who look at it this way. It could have ended a lot worse. Pay up and learn from it.

    • spackbace on 26/10/2019 - 15:13
      +2

      Not sure why some are going after OP must think they are perfect or something

      Because it's a traffic light. Sun or not that's an important thing to check, and green light ahead doesn't constitute a green turn, which it didn't in this case. Could've very easily ended badly for a car going the other way, minding their own business and driving as per the traffic laws.

      • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 15:15
        -4

        indeed, but there was no traffic coming the other way (which is clear in the photo), if there had been i would have given way.

      • Snake 4 on 26/10/2019 - 16:06
        -1

        Well i never.

        A perfect used car salesperson.

        • spackbace on 26/10/2019 - 16:20
          -2

          Except I don't sell used cars, so what's your point?

  • Dont Care on 26/10/2019 - 16:22
    +1

    no. you're done. You may look into a payment plan to help you pay it off. you're lucky you didn't cause an accident. Being stupid is no defence for anything.

  • LincolnLenny on 26/10/2019 - 16:31
    +3

    If anything, all you'd be doing by using that defence is making admissions to driving without due care and attention which would get you a shiny new fine added on top.

  • Cheeper on 26/10/2019 - 17:05

    Traffic fines are like that… intentional or unintentional incidents are of no interest.
    The law does not give a shite either way unfortunately.

    • shadow7412 on 27/10/2019 - 08:12
      +1

      Fortunately, I'd say. The point is to avoid accidents by penalising dangerous behaviour, and being oblivious to the lights is a very good example of that.

  • kahn on 26/10/2019 - 17:10
    +4

    You can challenge this in court with something along the lines of "if the visor doesn't fit, you must acquit". If that fails, bring in some surprise witnesses - each more surprising than the last. I tell ya, the judge won't know what hit him!

  • grog on 26/10/2019 - 17:20
    +7

    Think of all the times you have been speeding and not caught [or done any other illegal driving]

    Then sit back and relax… you will have already saved many thousands of dollars by not getting caught before.

    • John Kimble on 26/10/2019 - 17:47

      Wow, what a great, positive, glass is mostly full outlook! haha

    • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 23:33

      yup, well said, this is where i'm at now.

  • John Kimble on 26/10/2019 - 17:46
    +1

    No way you're getting off.

    You can wait till almost due and appeal, to get an extension on your due date. You can also pay in installments…at least in NSW.

    • pegaxs on 26/10/2019 - 20:14
      -3

      Did this in Vic once. Got a ticket in something like January and didn't get it paid off till September. Leave everything to the last moment and appeal it. If the appeal gets squashed as well, appeal the appeal decision. Then once all the red tape has been used up, put it on lay-by and minimum repayments. I got it down to $10/fortnight.

      Sure, they got their money, but the personnel hours used up made the ticket worth almost $0

      • Euphemistic on 26/10/2019 - 20:29
        +3

        Cool story, but they got their money. they didn’t care that it took them extra time to get it and you wasted a bunch of taxpayer money to do it.

        By all means if you can’t afford it, stretch it out and go for a payment plan, but if not you are just wasting tax dollars to make a point.

      • kahn on 26/10/2019 - 21:34
        +1

        That's an interesting literary style there in your first paragraph. It's like reading a whodunit novel.

        Sentences 1 & 2: An unknown subject is introduced.
        Sentences 3-5: A plot twist where the reader is given instructions.
        Sentence 6: The protagonist is revealed to be the author.

        Bravo, sir! Bravo!

      • LincolnLenny on 26/10/2019 - 21:49
        +1

        Congratulations, you did the wrong thing and wasted tax payer money because you're childish. Well done.

        • pegaxs on 26/10/2019 - 23:00
          -3

          Oh, won’t somebody think of the tax payers!

          My infringement price - Their labour costs = approximately between $10 and -$10.

          Worst case;

          -$10 / population of tax payers in Victoria… (let’s say, roughly 4 million eligible to pay state taxes) = $0.0000025…

          Oh, the burden it put on tax payers.

          Send me your PayPal address, Lenny. I’ll “friends and family” you back the $0.0000025

      • macdaddyjordan on 28/10/2019 - 10:49
        -1

        congrats you wasted tax payer's money

        but the biggest waste was your time…unless you don't have a job then you have all the time in the world

        • pegaxs on 28/10/2019 - 14:57
          -1

          Oh, the tax payers! Won't someone think of the tax payers?? Calculations above for all the cry babies and their "you wasted mah tax dollars!!1!1!!1!!!" The cost of my ticket would have covered 99.9% of their costs, so, the cost to tax payers was paid mostly by me.

          And how much time do you think it takes to write up a review request? Do you work 24H a day, 7 days a week? No spare time? No hobbies? I pitty your life if in the space of 9 months you can't spare a total of 1 hour to potentially get a ticket reviewed.

          Ironically, it was a speed camera on the Western Ring Road that was later found to be faulty. So much for them "reviewing" my fine.

          Oh, the tax payers. Oh the burden… You right getting down off your outrage soap box or do you need a hand?

          • macdaddyjordan on 30/10/2019 - 14:44

            @pegaxs: you would've called up more than once to get an extension of time and had to wait in queue. so definitely more than an hour

            • pegaxs on 30/10/2019 - 16:58

              @macdaddyjordan: Nah, you’re right. Next time I’ll just roll over and take the greasy stick of the law.

              Flow chart is;

              Wait for the warning letter - 4 weeks (0 mins spent)
              Wait till about 2 or 3 days before fine is due - 3 weeks (0 mins spent)
              Write a letter and ask for a review (5 ~ 10 mins spent)
              Review upholds ticket - 1 week
              Write a letter disputing the review. (5 ~ 10 mins spent)
              Review of review upheld - 1 week
              Ring to pay, but ask for extension (10 ~ 15 mins spent)
              Wait out extension - 4 weeks
              Ring to pay and request payment plan - $fine/$payment amount=time (15 ~ 20 mins spent)
              Set up auto pay through online banking (5 mins spent)
              About 1 hour (and maybe a bit) and 2 phone calls spent to push a ticket out for 9 months.

              It is amazing how fast they answer the phones at the revenue department when they think you want to pay them some money. Now, if you were calling them to get a refund or cash back, that can take hours.

  • hawkeye on 26/10/2019 - 17:52
    +4

    Tell them you where tripping on acid at the time but stopped at the next green light to make up for the red before to even it up.
    Let us know how you go

    • OzzyOzbourne on 28/10/2019 - 11:06
      +1

      Being on drugs is a reasonable excuse for murder, but not acceptable for a traffic offence!

  • frumper on 26/10/2019 - 23:34
    +6

    thanks all, fine paid, moving on.

    • [Deactivated] on 27/10/2019 - 19:25
      +2

      moving on

      Keep an eye out for those pesky red lights :p

      Ps: perhaps update your post with the update?

  • Hoobz on 27/10/2019 - 08:53
    +1

    There was a big high truck travelling in front of me on the country road.
    So big I couldn't see infront of it when I overtook.

    Didn't see the oncoming car full of nuns.

    Wiped them out. Not my fault. Couldn't see them.

    • TerryJustTerry on 28/10/2019 - 12:10

      At least nun were lost that day?

  • Waltervp on 27/10/2019 - 09:20
    +1

    Yes, easily done, but when on way to work means you ought to know there is a turning light… I got caught at 4am with no traffic on road when I did same after waiting for 2 minutes on my little scooter which was never going to trigger the light. A police car way in the distance saw me cross in the distance, and since we were the only vehicles on the road he caught up with me minutes later to fine me…. They're not just out to make roads safer, they want us to obey the law no matter what. And unfortunately I did the same at the same intersection a few years later in a car when I assumed the light was broken (the sensor in the road really was difficult to trigger), but no excuse, the law says you have to wait. My alternative was to go left if I really thought sensor was broken and go around the block. Most frustrating. These fines were in the eighties.

    • frumper on 27/10/2019 - 11:36
      -1

      i wasn't on way to work, i very rarely go that way and have never made that turn before, shrug sh&t happens.

    • geoffs87 on 28/10/2019 - 10:45

      Interesting that… i had a tricky one the other night, leaving the office at 10pm on my scooter. i waited about 10 mins for the signal to trigger, and unfortunately this was the only entry/exit out of the campus - scooter wouldnt trigger the light! I was wondering what would happen, what can you do? wait until some non existent car comes?

      In the end i remembered the pedestrian crossing triggers the lights also, so i got off my scooter, walked over to the pedestrian light, pressed it and voila! 2 mins later i was able to head on home. So ridiculous!

  • HeWhoKnows on 27/10/2019 - 09:32
    +1

    A bit hard to blame your visor

  • HeWhoKnows on 27/10/2019 - 09:36
    +1

    How many times have OBs been caught by traffic lights turning red after being green for like 3 to 5 seconds.
    Like not even enough time for 3 or 4 cars to pass before its amber or even red.
    Seems very common even on main roads outside the typical 7.30am to 6.30pm traffic in Sydney.

    This is not road safety. Its exactly the opposite!

  • lost in transit on 27/10/2019 - 09:49
    +2

    Whats your driving record like, maybe if it's great you maybe able to send an apology and plead your case, it will cost you nothing and they can only say no. You don't need traffic lights to cause an accident,I was hit by a vehicle on my motorbike (rear ended at 100kms while I was stationary) back in 92 , never worked again as a carpenter and still have severe pain daily . Your lucky you didn't cause an accident and learn from it. We all make mistakes out there. Goodluck.

  • bbinc on 27/10/2019 - 16:11

    I had a similar infringement and ended up just copping it. This was in SA, and there was no red arrow anywhere near the stop line or the carriageway I was on (Southbound). The only red arrow was on the exit side of the intersection 3 lanes away, the only signal on the southbound carriageway was green. The relevant authorities are all required to construct their intersections to comply with the Australian Traffic standards which state the red light has to be at the stop line or no more than 3 mtrs downstream, never upstream. So legally I only faced a green light. I couldn’t see the red turn arrow because of the opposite procession of huge trucks as I waited to turn.
    I submitted a defence pre payment, and was told, if I couldn’t see the lights I should have stopped at the stop line. But the relevant lights for the stop line were green and I had no idea there were turn arrows on the other side of the road. So technically if I had stopped that would also be an offence. I made some legal support enquiries and the general opinion was that I was correct,but I would need a magistrate with no risk of the views expressed here. Or I would end up with a criminal conviction, which has all sorts of ramifications. Yes, the State was wrong, the intersection does not meet the required standards, but the system wins. I would have needed a traffic engineer, an interstate trip from my home, accomodation, a lawyer, and then risk getting a magistrate who doesn’t have time to look into the detail. Kching Kching

  • Jackkkkkk on 28/10/2019 - 09:02
    +1

    to be honest…. this shouldn't be worth posting if you knowingly F*'d up (pardon my french) instead of attention grabbing. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

  • ClawShrimp on 28/10/2019 - 09:32

    Struggling to find any grey area here.

    You ran a red light.
    The fine is for running a red light.
    The red light camera did its job perfectly.

    There’s no ambiguity here at all. The punishment fits the (intentional or otherwise) crime.

    Sorry, but you have absolutely no grounds for appeal.

  • happirt on 28/10/2019 - 09:43
    +2

    pay up and save yourself the time.

  • OneJay on 28/10/2019 - 09:57

    I dont know about QLD but in my experience in VIC, specifically Ringwood Magistrates Court, if you have clean history and plead guilty you’ll have your fine waived in under 60 seconds.

    If you have a somewhat sketchy history and plead guilty you’ll get a 50% discount.

    If you’re the worst kind of driver there is, with history so bad you shouldn’t even hold a licence, plead not guilty, and actively argue why you were in the right, the Magistrate will simply give you the same fine and send you on your way.

    This is from what I witnessed earlier this year.

    • lainey13 on 28/10/2019 - 12:44

      I also experienced this at the CBD magistrates court

  • FareEvader on 28/10/2019 - 10:04

    Unlucky OP :( Highly unlikely that your fine will be revoked for that reason though.

  • syousef on 28/10/2019 - 10:21

    These posts keep getting more ridiculous. How can you pass the driving test without being made aware that intent has nothing to do with whether or not you're guilty of failing to obey a traffic signal???

  • Kamsi on 28/10/2019 - 12:45

    If you going to fight it get a better lawyer. If Paul Keating can get away with running a red light every one can :)

    However, the easiest way out is pay the fine and move on.

    Paul Keating
    "You can't have someone tell you you did something you didn't do. There's got to be some moral clarity about the way we live our lives,"

  • kurisu on 28/10/2019 - 12:52

    I'm sorry but OzBargain forums is not able to help with traffic infringements unless you post an MS Paint diagram. As a long time lurker, you should've been aware of this.

  • Whomastadon on 28/10/2019 - 17:01
    +1

    Every traffic thread:

    " Guys I ran a red light because I couldn't be bothered waiting, but I don't want to pay the fine, do you think I should contest? "

    • pegaxs on 28/10/2019 - 18:38

      *insert 3 pages of "rEvEnUe rAiSiNg" outrage*

  • [Deactivated] on 28/10/2019 - 19:04

    Don't try to weasel out of this one, m8

  • Okayy on 28/10/2019 - 21:38
    +1

    Bugger off!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join