Attempted Overtake, Decided Not to, Handed $530 Fine

L[Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 21:26
Last edited 13/08/2020 - 22:35 by 1 other user

FINAL COMMENTS BEFORE I DELETE THIS ACCOUNT:
Hi all, thanks for everybody's input. I realise that I demonstrated poor judgement and I will learn from that.

However since uploading the footage, many people are comparing the complex thought processes and various other external factors involved in this situation in real life and are diminishing it a simple 2D video on youtube that you are free to pause and press your face up against. I appreciate everybody who offered sound reasoning for their comments (whether for my side or against) rather than just saying how idiotic I was.

I have not decided yet whether I will contest it in court. I have some time to think about it.

ORIGINAL POST:
I just want to say I know how posts here about speeding fines and not stopping at stop signs etc.. are blasted by this community and the OP is told to just cop the fine and pay up as they were in the wrong.

I'm not here for that, I just want to share my experience today and ask if I was actually in the wrong. If I am, I have no problem accepting the fine but if I am not, whether I should appeal in court and how successful these appeals usually are. Thanks everybody

I am travelling on a two lane highway in regional QLD. There is a large SUV in front of me (think Prado size but I don't remember the exact make and model) let's call it car A.

Car A is travelling around 90kmh in the 100kmh zone. I had just passed a dedicated overtaking zone where I had only managed to catch up to car A and I know it's at least another 5km or so until the next overtaking zone. Dotted centre line comes up. I can't see past car A due to it's wide body so I do a little peeking manoeuvre. I see no oncoming cars. I pull into the oncoming lane and immediately start to accelerate as one does when overtaking. I now see an oncoming car in the distance. I then notice that car A begins to accelerate too (which to my knowledge is illegal, but please correct me if I am wrong). I remain in the oncoming lane for a split second as my brain gauges whether I am able to overtake car A or not. I decide not to, brake and pull back in behind car A.

Now, turns out the oncoming car is highway patrol. They flash their lights, do a u-turn and pull me over. I am civil and respectful. I mention that I did not see the oncoming car before I tried to overtake car A but I don't mention that car A accelerated when I tried to overtake as I know that arguing with a cop usually doesn't work out in one's favour. They hand me a fine for "driving without due care and attention". 3 demerits and $530 fine, saying that what I did was dangerous behaviour and is the main reason there are high speed crashes on the highways. I say OK officer, have a nice day.

Did I commit any offence here? Again, please don't insult me or blast me for being some sort of hoon. I'm not. Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Edit: To anybody who has appealed traffic offences similar to this, where you are able to justify your actions: were you successful? And was it worth all the hassle and stress or did you look back and think you should have just accepted the fine and the increased insurance premiums?

EDIT: I've got access to my dashcam footage and I've uploaded it to youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfLfCSVOMOw

Combined Forum Post (from Node 558123)

Merged from Attempted Overtake, Decided Not to, Handed $530 Fine PART 2 NOW WITH FOOTAGE
Automotive

closed Comments

          • Vote for Pedro on 11/08/2020 - 18:24
            +2

            @TheMindsetTraveller: So, back to your nanny state comment. What laws would you change?

            Also, first class? Lol.

            • TheMindsetTraveller on 12/08/2020 - 00:17
              -1

              @Vote for Pedro: Already gave you an example of one I think needs to change.

              Are you referring to First class flying? If yes, happy to swap and talk about actual experiences with you any day.

            • Slopshua on 12/08/2020 - 08:26
              +1

              @Vote for Pedro: Yeah also got a chuckle out of that. More like third world motorways

        • EspressoDan on 12/08/2020 - 22:30

          It's not about the speed of the vehicle, it's about the speed of your reactions and the energy involved in an accident.

          E=mv^2. The ^2 is important.

  • burningrage on 09/08/2020 - 22:24
    +7

    Usually if it was me, if I can't overtake the car within 10-12 seconds, I wouldn't even try and wait until the next overtaking lanes.

    Having said that, "Driving without due care and attention" is very debatable. The fact that you changed your mind and returned back I would argue means that you are paying attention. On the other hand, we don't know how close you were with the oncoming car before you changed back.

    If you have a passenger that can be asked as witness, I would say give the appeal a try as cops usually drive in pairs so they would have their own witness as well but with your witness, you may have a chance to create reasonable doubt.

    • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 22:35

      Unfortunately I didn't have any passengers. I do have dashcam footage but
      1. I'm unable to access it at this stage (left my sd card reader at my other residence and won't be back from rural QLD until next weekend)
      2. As another comment above pointed out, it could also burn me. Especially as it wouldn't have filmed car A next to me when it accelerated, so I feel there could be more cons than pros that come out of using the footage.

      • Drifta on 09/08/2020 - 22:52
        +1

        You dont need to necessarily show evidenceof car A accelerating. Your word is sufficient and it will show the road was clear when you took a "peak" - as long as it was a straight section of road otherwise certainly considered dangerous if overtaking around a blind bend

      • burningrage on 10/08/2020 - 09:34
        +1

        I think the objective here is to create a reasonable doubt given the vague offense they gave you.

        You just need to demonstrate via your dashcam that at the time attempted overtake it was clear before it wasn't and you returned back immediately.

        To me (and hopefully to most people too), that's paying attention.

      • stumo on 11/08/2020 - 13:07
        +1

        yeah its probably worth a shot. At least get a few second opinions on the footage.

        My guess is even if you did proceed with the overtake and ran the Police off the road you would have still got that same fine.

        It all rests on the fact you aborted, and the circumstances of that abort.

    • bobbified on 09/08/2020 - 22:49
      +31

      Usually if it was me, if I can't overtake the car within 10-12 seconds, I wouldn't even try

      IMHO, 10-12 seconds is actually a long time to be spending on the other side of the road. But the rules don't seem to care about that as long as you don't exceed the speed limit.

      I have to be honest here - I know it's illegal, but I hit the accelerator as soon as I make the decision to overtake and I can see it's all clear. I won't go into what speeds I get up to in the process, but I can say that speed is not definitely the first thing on my mind. Watching for approaching cars is my priority and then moving back in as soon as I'm safely past the car I'm overtaking. It'll probably be around 3-4 seconds maximum that I'm on the other side of the road.

      • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:30
        +19

        Yup. Actual safety before legally prescribed safety.

      • Euphemistic on 10/08/2020 - 06:05
        +5

        . It'll probably be around 3-4 seconds maximum that I'm on the other side of the road.

        Maybe count it out in your head. If you are passing a car that quickly you are going fast enough to get a significant ticket.

        Once your wheels cross the centre line and until you a fully crossed back again will be considered overtaking, not the period of time you are beside the other car. If you can do that in 3-4 seconds you are going way to fast.

        • bobbified on 10/08/2020 - 09:47
          +8

          If you can do that in 3-4 seconds you are going way to fast.

          You're right and I do admit that I go quite fast for those few seconds while I'm on the other side. I've found that doing so eliminates the need to worry about some clown trying to speed up while being overtaken. By the time they realise they're being overtaken, it's too late for them to speed up.

          Over all these years of highway driving, I've found that truck drivers are generally the most courteous. I'm usually happy to sit behind them for a while because as soon as it's safe, they'll make room for other vehicles to pass.

          • macfudd on 10/08/2020 - 21:13
            +5

            @bobbified: Agree on the truckies there. I'm someone who usually passes in a similar manner to you - depending on the vehicle I'm in (the mighty micra I'll be waiting until a proper passing lane thank you very much). The approach has its own dangers though, few months back I had someone do it to me, but they swung a little too wide while accelerating past, touched the rough edge of the opposite lane, overcorrected and nearly cleaned me up as they bounced back across the road.
            I'd like to say I avoided the accident with some ninja braking reflexes but the truth is I nearly needed a new pair of pants and I suspect they certainly did.

            • bobbified on 10/08/2020 - 21:28
              +2

              @macfudd:

              the mighty micra I'll be waiting until a proper passing lane thank you very much.

              I would too! You'd need to take quite a bit of a run-up to do an overtake in one of those! 🤣🤣

              The approach has its own dangers though,…

              Agree with you there - gotta be really careful when to accelerate hard because of the way the surface of the road is shaped. The highways are usually shaped like an inverted "V" so that the water runs off either side the road in heavy rain. So when crossing the median strip at too great of an angle, the car often suddenly leans to the right in the opposite direction. Those who don't know will get a sudden shock and try to correct it. I always cross very gradually and then accelerate hard once the car is pointing straight, followed by a gradual move back into the correct side of the road.

              If I'm being overtaken, I usually check behind and slow down a bit if I can so that the overtaking car can move in front of me as quickly as they can. No-one wins if there's an accident and they can easily take me with them!

              I'd like to say I avoided the accident with some ninja braking reflexes but the truth is I nearly needed a new pair of pants and I suspect they certainly did.

              Good job! I'm glad you didn't actually need those new pants in the end - you'd have a tough time trying to explain that one! LOL.

              • CocaKoala on 12/08/2020 - 12:01
                +1

                @bobbified: 100% with you two here.

                Additionally, if someone overtakes me, I let them do so real quick my slowing down a bit of possible. And I could assure you that they will be gone far ahead in no time. Because they're definitely doing over the speed limit and much higher average speed than me.

                • bobbified on 12/08/2020 - 12:07
                  +1

                  @CocaKoala:

                  And I could assure you that they will be gone far ahead in no time. Because they're definitely doing over the speed limit and much higher average speed than me.

                  It's also good to know that there's someone ahead of you who will draw out any cops who might be hiding in their car in the bushes! 🤭

      • stringbean402 on 13/08/2020 - 15:37

        Spot on !

  • trustnoone on 09/08/2020 - 22:25
    +11

    "driving without due care and attention"

    Erghh biggest catch all fine ever in my opinion. Should've told them the other car accelerated though, it sounds like you had a good reason for why you did what you did, that you could say you did so which "showed due care and attention".

    If you had footage I'd probably fight it. Police don't know everything and they wouldn't know if the other car accelerated or not unless you told them, so IMO I'm not saying to argue with police but these are important facts that would help you.

  • Drifta on 09/08/2020 - 22:29
    +3

    I dont think you've done anything wrong based on your description of events unfolding. I beleive you should dispute this in court, as clearly you have decided to back off when the conditions changed and you noticed a car approaching showing awareness of road changing road conditions. You have 2 options in court. Pleased guilty or not guilty. Even though I think you should plead not guilty as you are not at fault, practically I think you should plead guilty and explain the circumstances to the judge. I would also sight your good driving history assuming you have a good history. The judge should be able to squash the fine and demerits, or at the least reduce the amount you have to pay given the circumstances with no demerits. Worst case you will be stuck with the fine and demerit but highly unlikely they would add any extra costs (it is rare in most circumstances of this nature)

      • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:24
        +2

        I now see an oncoming car in the distance. I then notice that car A begins to accelerate too

        I think the comment was taking this into account.

        If you're trying to overtake someone who is accelerating, the length of clear road required is indefinite. Based on that, OP may indeed not have done anything wrong.

  • Tee Rex Arms on 09/08/2020 - 23:02
    -5

    Police will have dash cam and body worn camera footage of your interaction. Was the line broken or unbroken? I’m sure they would’ve loved seeing a car on the other side of the ride speeding towards them without even knowing what was in front of the car they were attempting to overtake.

    They’ll enjoy their day off in the magistrates court in air con sipping coffee when you’re found guilty and not only have to pay the fine but also the offenders levy imposed by the court.

  • JimmyF on 09/08/2020 - 23:09

    I mention that I did not see the oncoming car before I tried to overtake car A

    Oh

    They hand me a fine for "driving without due care and attention". 3 demerits and $530 fine, saying that what I did was dangerous behaviour and is the main reason there are high speed crashes on the highways. I say OK officer, have a nice day.

    They are correct, and yes sounds like the fine fits the crime…. As someone who travels on the open road often, drivers who did what you did are a real PIA. You need to ensure you can see the entire road in front you need to over take. If there is a dip or a hill, assume there is a car there, just like what happened to you today.

    Sorry pay the fine.

    BTW this title is wrong

    Attempted overtake, decided not to, handed $530 fine

    No, you only 'decided' to not overtake as there was a car coming towards you when you pulled out!

    • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:21
      +9

      As someone who travels on the open road often, drivers who did what you did are a real PIA.

      I could say the same about people who travel 10kmh below the speed limit on a straight stretch of dry road with no other cars or obstacles in front of them.

      If you're going that slow, please don't be surprised when someone stuck behind you wants to overtake! (legally of course)

      • JimmyF on 10/08/2020 - 08:43

        I could say the same about people who travel 10kmh below the speed limit

        and I wouldn't disagree with you either.

        If you're going that slow, please don't be surprised when someone stuck behind you wants to overtake! (legally of course)

        Also don't disagree, but the issue is the OP didn't LEGALLY overtake in this case. There was a police car in a blind spot who felt it was too close for comfort to issue a fine!

    • timthetoolman on 09/08/2020 - 23:24

      So how does that make their title incorrect?

      • JimmyF on 10/08/2020 - 08:46
        -6

        Well 'decided' implies they changed their mind to not overtake, but the car coming towards them when they pulled out flashing their lights at them, caused them to change their mind more so.

        OP pulled out to overtake
        OP starts overtaking
        OP sees car appear from nowhere flashing lights to warn them
        OP doesn't have room to complete overtaking
        OP 'decides' to not overtake now
        OP gets fine for nearly having a head on with a police car

        • Luo18740 on 10/08/2020 - 09:11

          I think OP had moved over before the flashing lights. WIthout the dash cam, we can't judge how close the cop car was.

        • timthetoolman on 10/08/2020 - 12:02
          -1

          What a dumb argument. Op clearly changed their mind. Who else decided for them to move back in to their lane?

          • JimmyF on 10/08/2020 - 12:59
            +1

            @timthetoolman: Pretty much like this thread IMHO. OP screwed up overtaking with a oncoming police car. Clearly the police deemed it dangerous behaviour so issued a fine.

  • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:21
    +2

    Depends how much margin there is.

    Without dashcam footage then I will assume everything you said is to paint a best case scenario, in which case, you're not unreasonable. There are idiots out there who accelerate on overtaking lanes or try to block someone off from overtaking.

    As for the highway copper, just ignore the preachy attitude. Comes with the bloody uniform.

    Get a dashcam so you don't have to have these arguments. Pay the fine as it is futile to argue. You may win but it will cost you more to do so.

    • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:31

      You may win but it will cost you more to do so.

      That's why I'm also wondering if people have had any success with appealing traffic offences in the past!
      I.e. was it worth the hassle and stress or should I just accept the fine and my raised insurance premiums next year?

      • [Deactivated] on 09/08/2020 - 23:42
        +2

        No point. I tried arguing against something very obviously unfair and was essentially told that if they can make it stick, it sticks.

        They even tried to get me for parking in a no standing area… wait for it… that they just put the sign up for. Yeah, it was permissible parking in the morning, it wasn't at the end of the day. (This one got thrown out only after I showed evidence that the sign wasn't there in the morning.)

        Thank goodness I have a dashcam in every car.

      • w37hsyea on 12/08/2020 - 09:20
        +2

        Yeah, I've had success.

        Recommendation - read the equivalent Road Safety Act and its relevant regulations in QLD - I'm not sure what it is called up there. Note down from the fine what regulation was used.

        Addressing the Magistrate, write up a letter as a brief statement about who you are as a standing citizen, whether you have a job or do other community work, discuss the scenario you were involved in and how your actions relate to the relevant regulation you were fined under. Briefly discuss whether any factors were in contrast to what happened. If you were at fault according to what you have read in the legislation - then note this and provide a statement that you have learnt from this action. If you were not at fault - then discuss the differences with rationality and causal effect.

        Secondly - write a letter to the constable in a similar fashion - discuss briefly who you are, what you do and apologise for the scenario that put you in that situation to be fined. Mention what you have learnt and if applicable, describe why your circumstances may be different. Send this by email to their station.

        Keep a copy of both letters for when you are in front of the Magistrate and follow the instructions on the fine to dispute.

    • Butt Scratcher on 12/08/2020 - 15:59
      +1

      As for the highway copper, just ignore the preachy attitude. Comes with the bloody uniform.

      I don't like how they are so anal, but it's somewhat understandable from my perspective.

      The whole purpose of highway patrol is to enforce road rules, that's their entire purpose. You have 1 job to do, you're gunna do it. Regular cop's are generally a lot more lenient from what I've seen.

      • [Deactivated] on 12/08/2020 - 16:58

        The whole purpose of highway patrol is to enforce road rules, that's their entire purpose.

        Telling someone who is copping a fine that "they could have killed someone" or "they're disappointed", etc. is not part of the job. That's just making a condescending statement when in a position of power and under the protection of the uniform.

        I have no qualms with the officer issuing a fine.

  • Cheeper on 09/08/2020 - 23:26

    I can't comment on your dilemma as there is so many variations that are possible but I do agree with you on not arguing about it with the cop. If they have their mind set to book you then that is what will happen so keep your mouth shut and dont make it any worse.
    If you dont have any video evidence then it is just your word against the cop and in any court with no evidence you will lose.
    Pay the fine and start to look at a good dashcam, preferrably one that logs gps info.

  • screensaver on 09/08/2020 - 23:43
    +1

    If you are wanting to avoid penalty, consult lawyer. I have got out of penalties by asking for a dismissal under section 10. (with an explanation) but its a while since i did that.

    • OzHunterNSW on 10/08/2020 - 10:06

      It would mean he would have to attend a QLD Court

  • AustriaBargain on 10/08/2020 - 02:00
    +9

    He was travelling at 90 and the next overtaking place was 5 away, so it was 3.33 minutes away. So all in all it would have saved you 33 seconds by overtaking now instead of waiting for the overtaking part 5ks ahead. You paid $500 and three points to try and save 33 seconds. Your time must be very valuable OP. In the time you took to write this thread you must have been paid at least a few thousand dollars, from whatever it is that makes your time more valuable than all of our lives.

    • steven6 on 10/08/2020 - 02:08
      +2

      3.33 mins = 200 seconds
      Only save 20 seconds?

      • AustriaBargain on 10/08/2020 - 02:10
        +2

        Well he only would have been traveling 10 ks per hour faster if he were in front.

    • kurisu on 11/08/2020 - 10:15
      +2

      I'm pretty sure there are only 60 seconds in a minute, not 100. So 0.33 of a minute is only 20 seconds, not 33.

  • 2enjoy on 10/08/2020 - 07:26
    +25

    I’m going to sound critical, but it needs to be mentioned. This about your life and the lives of other innocent people.
    - Error 1. You know the next overtaking opportunity is only 5kms away. It’s not far at all, especially for a 10km speed difference. When you attempt an overtake, you risk lives.. it’s not worth it.
    - Error 2. You couldn’t clearly see the road far enough ahead, to know for sure, that there were no oncoming cars. Yet decided to pull out anyway..
    The fine in my view is likely deserved.
    Learn your lesson, be thankful and don’t make these errors again.

    • AlanHB on 11/08/2020 - 22:37
      +2

      I agree here. If the cop car couldn't be seen until half way through the overtake, it suggests that it wasn't safe to overtake.

      Sounds like you were overtaking with an upcoming bend or approaching the top of a hill where you didn't have the best visibility of the road ahead.

    • botteur on 12/08/2020 - 15:21
      +1

      Just to add to that comment,
      It takes 3min 20s to cover 5k@90k/h, and 3min to cover 5k@100k/h, so the overall potential saving was a whopping 20 seconds

  • Lurk Hartog on 10/08/2020 - 08:31
    -8

    "I then notice that car A begins to accelerate too (which to my knowledge is illegal, but please correct me if I am wrong)."
    Wrong. It is not illegal to accelerate from 10km under the limit, to the speed limit.

    It is illegal to accelerate to above the speed limit to overtake, which is presumably what you were planning on doing.

    • Krogers on 10/08/2020 - 08:53
      +11

      It's illegal to prevent another vehicle overtaking

      • Luo18740 on 10/08/2020 - 09:14

        But put yourself in the cop's shoes in this situation. Which car are you going to pull over?

        • Krogers on 10/08/2020 - 09:39
          +3

          OP

      • OzHunterNSW on 10/08/2020 - 10:05

        He didn't prevent anything as it was a dedicated overtaking section

        • Krogers on 10/08/2020 - 10:06
          +2

          No it wasn't

    • bobbified on 10/08/2020 - 10:26
      +9

      Wrong. It is not illegal to accelerate from 10km under the limit, to the speed limit.

      It IS illegal to increase your speed while being overtaken.

      • Lurk Hartog on 10/08/2020 - 13:08
        -3

        *citation missing

        So if a slow moving truck is accelerating, trying to increase their speed to the speed limit, and cars start overtaking them, you're saying that they are breaking the law unless they stop accelerating each time a car is passing them?

        • bobbified on 10/08/2020 - 13:30
          +4

          *citation missing

          Here's a general article (yes, I know it's just Yahoo):
          https://au.news.yahoo.com/how-much-motorists-could-be-fined-…

          And some state-specific rules (I haven't gone looking for the the reference in every state, but I can tell you that it IS illegal in every state and territory). I think you'll get the idea from the few I have listed below. Increasing your speed while being overtaken could easily cause the car trying to overtake to have a head-on.

          QLD Offence:
          Increasing speed when being overtaken Queensland Road Rules—Section 145 2 $80
          (https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/fines/demerit/points)

          SA:
          When driving a vehicle being overtaken by another vehicle, you must:
          *not increase your speed until the other vehicle has completely overtaken your vehicle and returned to the lane or line of traffic.
          (https://mylicence.sa.gov.au/road-rules/the-drivers-handbook/…)

          NSW:
          When being overtaken you must:
          *not increase your speed
          (https://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/safety-rules/road-rules/ove…)

          TAS:
          ….so you deliberately increase your speed to 110km while they’re attempting to overtake… This is unsafe and if you are intercepted by police you face a fine of $140 – yes it is an offence, which is ‘Increase speed while being overtaken and before overtaking vehicle has safely returned’.
          (https://www.police.tas.gov.au/what-we-do/traffic-policing/tr…)

          • Lurk Hartog on 10/08/2020 - 15:46
            +1

            @bobbified: Nice. Thanks for that.

            I do wonder how it applies in the scenario I've posted though. Surely slow moving trucks can't be expected to stop accelerating because a bunch of people want to overtake?

            • bobbified on 10/08/2020 - 16:00

              @Lurk Hartog:

              Nice. Thanks for that.

              nw.. we all learn new things every day. :)

              I do wonder how it applies in the scenario I've posted though. Surely slow moving trucks can't be expected to stop accelerating because a bunch of people want to overtake?

              There's no camera to detect such an offence, so the situation is going to involve the initial assessment of an officer. I assume that they will only hand out tickets to those who blatantly accelerate to try and prevent others overtaking them rather than someone who's just trying to get up to speed. I mentioned earlier that I've found that truckies are generally the most courteous on the roads. A lot of them will slow down or indicate to allow themselves to be overtaken (I'm not a career truck driver or anything remotely close to that).

  • Boogerman on 10/08/2020 - 08:54
    +5

    Challenge it in court. You’ll win easily
    It’s amazing how people are unwilling to grasp that police aren’t judges. They would need video to CLEARLY prove it was a wilfully dangerous move, as the relevant law is too subjective
    On a related note, get yourself an electric car - you overtake in the blink of an eye & overtaking options are hugely expanded

    • [Deactivated] on 10/08/2020 - 09:11
      +2

      overtake in the blink of an eye & overtaking penalty options are hugely expanded

      I don't disagree with the EV or overtaking quickly but just a reminder, we live in a nanny state. If we do some dangerous but within the law, it's all good. Break the law to avoid danger and it's going to "kill us all."

      • Boogerman on 10/08/2020 - 10:11
        +5

        It’s funny how shitty people get when you overtake them (flash their lights in your subsequent rear view mirror) either because their ego is crushed or because they don’t understand that they’re driving something that is a relative truck at accelerating & can’t do what an electric car can
        EDIT: There was a case where a motorcyclist successfully challenged a fine for speeding because it avoided an accident (can’t remember which state, but it was about 4 years ago). Personally, I value my life & I will go over the posted speed limit while overtaking to avoid a head on. If someone’s doing 95 in 100 zone, I’ll hit 120 to overtake. Just gotta stay under 25 over, to avoid losing licence

  • popsiee on 10/08/2020 - 08:58

    I can tell you the lawyer ( all legal personal actually ) will believe your story and with current times needs the $$$$$$$$$$ more than ever .

    Now besides that its your word against a Copper and I think we know who wins in court .

    Based on that you know what you should do .

  • Speckled Jim on 10/08/2020 - 09:00

    You have footage and a logical explanation. Cops (should) have footage and a vague charge.
    Sounds like you were within the law.

    I'd take it to court.

  • MontyMacaw on 10/08/2020 - 09:40
    +12

    Having once made a hobby of successfully defending traffic infringements (5 successfully) I would defend this one.

    The onus of proof is on the police. You don’t have to prove your innocence. So your best defence is to question what they were doing, what specifically they recollect from the day and where they had been and where they were going. What do they recall about the day and the incident? The weather, the position of the sun, road conditions, where exactly you were - a google earth photo may help confuse them. Usually you are just a footnote in their daily schedule which gets muddied with all the other days of doing the same monotonous things. Try and get a court date as far out as possible so that your questioning of their recollection is based solely on their paperwork and not on their actual memory. Don’t appeal the notice until the time limit to do so is close. NEVER admit to breaking the speed limit or doing anything unlawful. That will sink you no matter what else comes up. Appeal to the court to consider that the police might have got it wrong and their recollection is weak compared to yours. The story about the other car speeding up could help but you would phrase it as a question to the police rather than you saying it happened. When they say they didn’t notice it then you would come back with a question that asked if they would change their assessment of the situation if they had factored in that situation. If they say no then you go again about how can they say that when they don’t recall anything other than the paperwork they are using as their reference point. You can see where I’m going with this. You might be surprised at what happens. Or you could get court costs added to your fine.

    • Misplaced on 10/08/2020 - 10:23
      +6

      Ahhh, the anus of proof. It is always the Police Officer's perspective of what is going on that is the "right" one. I once was lectured by a Police Officer for supposedly going through "a clean red light". From my perspective, and that of the 2 other people in the Car, it was orange the whole way through. And it was. The Police Officer insisted that I must be colourblind. Now, he was escorting an Ambulance (with no flashing lights on either of them, mind you), and the lights automatically change quickly for them at some intersections. Therefore he assumed *(without seeing the actual lights I was facing), that the light must have been red. At no stage was it red. He was wrong, and I contested it and ultimately won.

      • Andremelb on 11/08/2020 - 14:40
        +3

        I do hope that's a typo :)

    • gomelbcityfc on 12/08/2020 - 01:13

      Sorry mate, but you’re wrong. Having grown up around coppers (yet never becoming one ;), I can tell you that in cases where the court is asked to rely on verbal evidence only, as a “sworn officer” the copper only needs to swear to have “witnessed” the incident of dangerous driving. He DOES NOT need any other evidence. Of course, then it comes down to whom the magistrate believes, i.e.how convincing OP is on the stand.

      • MontyMacaw on 12/08/2020 - 05:27

        And that complacency by the police is exactly what needs to be exploited in court.

  • Mikeyphoto48 on 10/08/2020 - 09:46
    +2

    Jeeez,, tough crowd, some of you have him tried and hung lol.
    My only comment is that any overtaking lane permits it only if it’s safe to do so. It sounds like you exercised your right to decide it wasn’t safe after all. Good luck.

    • Luo18740 on 10/08/2020 - 11:30

      any overtaking lane

      It wasn't an overtaking lane.

      Also, this thread is going the way most threads go, as usually police issue fines for a reason.

  • OzHunterNSW on 10/08/2020 - 10:04
    -4

    Strangely you hide your actual speed…. I wonder why.

    It has nothing to do with overtaking, it is to do with your speed.

    You should be conscious that trucks are governed by road conditions, hills etc.

    I surmise this overtaking lane was near a hill… and that the truck driver elected to gain as much speed "legally so" in order to overcome this hill. Yes?

    Maybe try telling the Judge your story without all the facts.

  • Misplaced on 10/08/2020 - 10:17

    Common sense goes beyond an individual's interpretation of the Law on any given day. You made a decision in full belief that it was the safest thing to do at the time. It was not an evasive manoeuvre in response to sighting the Police Car up ahead. You should trust that your judgement was right. Why shouldn't you trust your judgement over that of an officious individual who wants to interpret your actions as being dangerous, when in fact the motivation for the action was completely the opposite? It is merely a small-minded opinion on his part - he is trained to think that way. You know you are in the right. Contest it.

  • Porker on 10/08/2020 - 10:33
    +1

    If I were to receive $530 fine, I too might start piecing things together in favour of me. We don't know what kind of road you were on, what the sight distance was, visibility through or around the slow car etc. If you pulled out and didn't see anything oncoming, but then did a few seconds later, that does suggest you weren't aware of the road conditions (eg. A dip, hill or curve) or not able to see oncoming vehicles properly, or not focused (?)

    200m apart at opposite speeds of 100km/h is not much time at all.

    Police may say - Highway Patrol are educated in road safety etc, such that what they saw they deemed a reckless move. Eg. from their perspective, they saw you pull out onto the wrong side of the road, at speed exceeding 100km/h, and then weaved back upon seeing an oncoming vehicle. The rapid movement out and then back into the lane indicates that there was poor judgement to perform the overtake, hence, fine.

    If you didn't see oncoming vehicles for whatever reasons, in the situation that they didn't see you, then when they did see you, you were already on the wrong side of the road at potentially close distance. If they did see you, they may have thought that there was no way you were ever going to overtake being (what may have been) relatively close distance to oncoming traffic.

    Just a different spin on things despite what you were doing no matter how right it seemed.

  • thereyougo on 10/08/2020 - 10:47

    I'm from country Victoria and found NSW and Queensland drivers speed up when your overtaking them, why, god knows. Do I scare them out of a daze then they suddenly realise their driving like miss daisy and put their foot down? Yes this is illegal and dangerous behaviour, cops should of thrown the book at paj driver.

  • ozray50 on 10/08/2020 - 11:43

    IMHO, you didn't do anything wrong because youhad a peek , made the correct decision that it wasn't safe and pulled back. The cops probably had a quiet day and wanted something to do. I would dispute it in court. I have successfully disputed a parking in a Loading Zone fine. I was a real estate agent with a sign and had parked in the city . My vehicle was a tarago which I thought was the same classification as a station wagon. It turned out that Taragos were classified as a bus, hence the fine. The magistrate actually agreed it was "an absurdity in the law" and I was let off the fine, so I think your situation was a very harsh judgement by the police and you may have a chance in court.

    • Euphemistic on 11/08/2020 - 07:44

      You need to be careful with the classification of vehicle. It is a silly bit in the law. Last time I looked quite a few 4wd wagons wouldn’t meet the criteria either.

  • Peter Enis on 10/08/2020 - 11:57
    +2

    If you didn't notice the oncoming vehicle until you pulled into the other lane, then you must have been driving too close to the vehicle in front to get a proper view of the road ahead. If you'd backed off a little instead, you would have seen the oncoming cop car without having to leave your lane at all.

  • trapper on 10/08/2020 - 16:09
    +3

    The fact you had to abort the maneuver indicates it probably wasn't 'safe' to attempt in the first place.

    Unlikely to get off this one.

    • cloudy on 11/08/2020 - 20:11
      +3

      The fact you had to abort the maneuver indicates it probably wasn't 'safe' to attempt in the first place.

      Pretty sure, the fact he aborted is acknowledgement it would not be safe to complete the maneuver.

      • trapper on 12/08/2020 - 11:14

        If he couldn't determine it was safe before he started, then it was not safe by definition.

        • cloudy on 12/08/2020 - 20:11
          -2

          If he couldn't determine it was safe before he started, then it was not safe by definition.

          Urr, lol, ok.

          I can not determine if its safe to drink the water from a water fountain, does that mean by definition its not safe? No, it just means I am not sure, does not mean the water is not safe.

          Does that help you understand the difference?

  • Kevan2 on 10/08/2020 - 21:55

    A couple of thoughts, time of day will change your chance of seeing g oncoming car, colour of police car which are normally painted not to stand out. When you went to make your move you were distracted by bad driving of the other car and you pulled back as soon as you noticed it was unsafe.

  • dji1111111 on 11/08/2020 - 08:31
    +10

    Something about your story doesn't make sense. How can your visibility of the oncoming traffic be affected by a SUV? You say it's wide body but it's only a standard SUV by your own description, roughly the size of a Prado. That makes me think you were either tailgating or you were attempting an overtake where there wasn't enough stretch of straight road or maybe there was a crest or something that didn't give you sufficient visibility into the distance.

    • theguyrules on 11/08/2020 - 08:44
      +4

      That's a good point, I was on OPs side up until now. I've been stuck behind small trucks that you cannot see around, but a prado? just back off a bit.

    • dufflover on 11/08/2020 - 09:20

      Probably tail-gating or at least well inside the 2-3 second recommended margin trying to make the point they are going waaaaayy too slow. Especially if they can't knowingly wait only a few more km for next overtake section.

      I hate Miss Daisy's as much as the next driver but sounds like a bad combination of impatience and a cop having a bad day. I do wonder what the Car A people are thinking though; all too regularly on a normal freeway I'll go to the next lane to overtake, only to then see them full on accelerate again.

      • RocketSwitch on 11/08/2020 - 09:22
        +1

        Before COVID, the amount of tailgating I was coping was on a daily basis, and I would go 100-104 in a 100 zone on the left lane. It's nuts. Not sure why people are in such a hurry, just back off and go the speed limit.

        • adn on 11/08/2020 - 09:33
          +1

          When I was on my Ps. I thought I was fast and furious.
          Then i realise no matter what i did, I would save maximum a few minutes.
          Now i love seeing mercedes/vw with p plates do sick moves and still be stuck at the light as i slowly roll up next to them.

    • RocketSwitch on 11/08/2020 - 09:20

      Yeah, good point, was gonna say, damn cop was tough, but lol, I think OP was tailgating now… naughty!

  • smartazz104 on 11/08/2020 - 09:37

    How close were you to the car in front of you when you decided to

    do a little peeking manoeuvre

  • RSmith on 11/08/2020 - 09:57
    +1

    know it's at least another 5km or so until the next overtaking zone

    Not worth risking for an extra 3 min 20 seconds.

    • stringbean402 on 13/08/2020 - 15:52

      Time that by a factor of 30-40 over an 8hr drive and suddenly it's fatigue that kills.

      The is regional Queensland, not a 20ming bash up your local freeway.

  • DarkOz on 11/08/2020 - 10:08

    I can't see past car A due to it's wide body so I do a little peeking manoeuvre.

    Dangerous move. The oncoming car could crash into you before you even know it. You'd have no time to react.

    I now see an oncoming car in the distance.

    That's the problem. You shouldn't see any oncoming car in the distance at the start of the overtake manoeuvre.

  • Blitz001 on 11/08/2020 - 10:12

    Couldn’t have waited the extra 3-5 minutes for the over taking lane coming up? What was the rush?

    • Luo18740 on 11/08/2020 - 12:25

      The Prado was going only 10k's under limit, and OP had only just caught up to it.

      There was no need to overtake in the next 5km, he was just frustrated at not getting past it in the previous Overtaking lane.

  • Bid Sniper on 11/08/2020 - 10:42
    +1

    Wasn't a safe overtake; if you can't see, fall back or dont try.

    Popping out behind a vehicle you cant see in front into a oncoming lane is dangerous, Robocop is right.

  • El cheepo on 11/08/2020 - 10:44
    +4

    As someone who is overtaken regularly (which is fine, I’m in a truck) it’s refreshing to actually hear of someone realising its not safe and to bail out of an unsafe over take.

    On the other hand when there are over take lanes 5k apart and your looking at a 10kmph drop, not a wise move.

    As I’m sure other will have mentioned, its probably a minute or two you’ll lose waiting for that next overtake lane.

    And from a distance, imagine what seeing a oncoming car pull out into your lane And get presumably almost side on with another oncoming car only to bail last second looks like to the cops. It’s not a good look.

    Someone did it to me the other day in a little hatch back

    They over took a truck coming down a hill on solid lines and a bend, i was coming up the hill full noise only to see a little hatch back in my lane coming at me.
    I know I’d survive but they wouldn’t, its a scary sight.
    Luckily both myself and the other truck hit the brakes and that idiot made his overtake (again, nothing but praise for bailing on the overtake by you)

    Tldr: good on you for taking the safe option, bad choice trying it in the first place on a negligible speed difference and highway with regular overtaking lanes.

    Very low odds to get it thrown out imo

  • This Guy on 11/08/2020 - 10:59

    From what you said:

    You crossed the centreline with out visibility of on coming traffic; and
    You started an overtaking maneuver without enough visibility of on coming traffic or without looking.

    You crossed into on coming traffic twice without making sure the road was clear first. This is very stupid.

    When the police officer talked to you, I doubt you conveyed that you knew how dumb and dangerous your actions were, so I doubt you conveyed remorse. The ticket was the officer's way of telling you to wake up to your self.

    You are lucky the officer did not punch you in the face and throw your keys in the grass. You threatened their life with your actions and your nonplussed attitude would have been rage inducing in the moment.

    But….

    We were all young once. I did plenty of dumb things as a young adult that I now regret.

    If you want to appeal this, DO NOT admit you didn't see the on coming car. Purely blame the car in front for speeding up while overtaking. The car in front sped up, making over taking unsafe so you aborted.

    If you admitted to the police offer you did not see them then you may be screwed.

    If you go to court you might also be up for court costs.

    Edit: Not an insult, but you might want to get your eyes checked out.

  • gooseberry on 11/08/2020 - 11:37
    +1

    OP, something to consider in future, you said that the next overtake lane was another 5km or so away. Travelling at 100km/h vs 90km/h over that 5km would have only saved you 30 seconds in time.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join