Over the last three days, I have seen more police cars, more speed cameras, I mean almost triple what is out there as the norm. Now I know people do stupid stupid stuff on the road at this time of the year usually alchohol related, but my observations have been during the day.

Now the reason for my perplexion is why can Police now be out and about in such force, pulling drivers over on highways (an assumption is being made by me that this is for speeding or other such traffic related fault), putting speed cameras all over the place. When they dont do it in my view throughout the year with any consistency.

Now I have been a big advocate of the Police and the arduous, dangerous and most times sh*tty job that they do, but the sceptic in me is seeing more police action when there are double demerits in force. Sorry Sly and Ionic but please if you could can you throw some light on this for me as from where I am sitting this is cashing in. If it was RBT's at this time of the year then that in my mind would make a world of sense, but this no.

Scotty

\

During the holiday season the road death toll goes up, which is why they deploy more resources and officers during these months.

so australia will have a uniform set of rules that are optional for each state.. how is that any different to what we have now?

They were introduced way back in 1999 and universally implemented by all the States. They have been updated and a new version enacted called 2008.

The States have always had there own right to enforce what laws are most relevant to there State. The local councils nation wide have been doing it forever.

I.B.

saw yet another rbt this morning, as well as a blue bf wagon with heavy dark tint and dash lights driving around.

I do think it is great, just wish there was some way you could instantly materialize some cops when you need them, like tonight when I saw a p plater in a XR6 n/a doing 100+ in a 60 zone. I really hate these guys as they give the rest of us a bad rep.

His also probably a member on here to.

I.B.

who knows?

Edited December 18, 200817 yr by 1 of 5

Just to update you, I had my day in court today.

Good news is, the judge said I was a responsible person and overturned my suspension, so I can drive and have no licence suspensions to srew up my insurance. It certainly is a hige releif.

The only snag is I have 10 points until March this year, then I get 6 off. So I guess I'll still be holding everyone up for a little while longer.

I can now say from experience, given the range of serious offences (drivers with multiple suspensions, etc) getting let off, it's well worth going to court and giving ot a go.

Congrats on the favourbale result to you, however court can be one of the most dangerous lotteries going around and with poor driving records I could never reccomend it.

I.B.

Of course you need to do some research before you decide.

For example, if I'd have not paid the fine (as recomended by the RTA), the only course of action in coirt would be to try and proove I didn't speed (almost impossible). If you can't proove you weren't speeding, the judge has to award costs against you, and can increase the fine and suspension. However, if you pay the fine, the judge has more scope to either hear weather you were speeding or not (still subject to costs etc), or he/she can reduce the fine, suspension or remove them altogether if they decide you were hard done by. If you're only seeking leniency on a suspension, the worst that can happen is the judge say's no.

In my case, my driving record is not that bad, I represented myself and for the sake of a $73 court fee and a day off work, I was able to have my suspension overturned. If you value your licence, it's worth a try. I spoke to a Police Prosecutor before my day in court, who said 99% of the suspension apeals he sees are sucessful, but when drivers try to dispute the fine the tables turn and 99% of those fail.

Well done :angel:

Of course you need to do some research before you decide.

For example, if I'd have not paid the fine (as recomended by the RTA), the only course of action in coirt would be to try and proove I didn't speed (almost impossible). If you can't proove you weren't speeding, the judge has to award costs against you, and can increase the fine and suspension. However, if you pay the fine, the judge has more scope to either hear weather you were speeding or not (still subject to costs etc), or he/she can reduce the fine, suspension or remove them altogether if they decide you were hard done by. If you're only seeking leniency on a suspension, the worst that can happen is the judge say's no.

A few things very wrong with this paragraph.

If you pay the fine then you admit your guilt to the offence and then will not be heard by the judge or make it to court. The RTA is NOT on your side on such matters and should not be consulted. They are prosecuting against you.

If you cant prove that you were speeding, is only required for speed camera detected offences and the judge does NOT award costs because you cant prove this!!!!!!!!!!!!! Costs is more associated with with maclicious prosecutions against you or profound failures in an prosecution againts you. If the RTA told you this they have mislead you.

A judge will only have scope if you elect to have a matter heard before him. No other way.

I.B.