Red Light Camera Tickets Defeated In California

 

"An increasing number of motorists in California are doing their research and challenging red-light camera tickets in court. Many have been successful in fighting these tickets. Several of those who were convicted, have appealed their conviction and got it overturned based on the city's failure to comply with the California vehicle code. There are three basic defenses which motorists have used sucessfully to beat these tickets:

* Duration of the yellow light
* Legal Notification required to motorists
* Illegal Contigency Fee Contracts Used By Cities"

Read the rest of the article at: http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=12331

--
TomTom One XLS * Contact me about 1200 free print credits *

sponsored links

Good find

It is interesting the reaction by the cities with regards to wanting the rulings go unpublished. With the budget crisis in California, we all know the main motivation for the cameras. I'm curious how this will progress.

Instead of ticketing people

Instead of fining people who drive through red lights, I don't know why California doesn't just continue increasing the sales tax and vehicle registration fees to raise funds.

That would be a more equitable means of 'grabbing cash'. It would probably be more effective too.

Good News

....I like to see when people actually win their cases after taking time off work to fight it.

Yes-

Axegod wrote:

....I like to see when people actually win their cases after taking time off work to fight it.

Amen to that!

--
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680

me too!

So do I

--
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--

California Taxes

jwt873 wrote:

Instead of fining people who drive through red lights, I don't know why California doesn't just continue increasing the sales tax and vehicle registration fees to raise funds.

That would be a more equitable means of 'grabbing cash'. It would probably be more effective too.

California's sales taxes are already the highest in the country, I believe.

Having lived there for awhile, I can also say that their vehicle registration fees are very high.

I don't believe in collecting revenue from cams, but California taxes are already on the "unequitable" side.

Reduce Spending

The only way to solve California's problem is for them to drastically reduce state spending. More taxes only make the problem worse.

--
Tuckahoe Mike - Nuvi 3490LMT, Nuvi 260W, iPhone6s, Mazda MX-5 Nav

The state's way ahead of ya

jwt873 wrote:

Instead of fining people who drive through red lights, I don't know why California doesn't just continue increasing the sales tax and vehicle registration fees to raise funds.

Trust me, they do both wink California also has some strict rules regarding mileage for cars being registered in the state. The odometer has to show a minimum of 7500 miles. The claim was that the rule prevented people from buying out of state cars without the states more stringent smog controls. That may have been part of it long ago before virtually all vehicles were built the same for all states. Now it's just a handy way to prevent someone from going to another state where sales taxes are lower to purchase a vehicle.

Cheers

--
Garmin GPS III, GPS V, StreetPilot 2610, Mobile 10, Nuvi 660, Nuvi 760

Surf City moves forward with red-light cameras

--
NickJr Nuvi 3597LMT

wow!

nickjr wrote:

Read article at this link:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/cameras-light-red-2323166-beach-city

Well, at least a couple of people (link to that article) on the city counsel, had enough sense to vote against such a monstrosity!

--
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680

City Council

jimcaulfield wrote:

Well, at least a couple of people (link to that article) on the city counsel, had enough sense to vote against such a monstrosity!

The citizens of that area need to note the 5 that voted to put up the cams, and make sure they vote against them in the next election. Hurrah for the two that voted against it.

I saw an interesting

I saw an interesting supposition about radar cameras the other day. One judge is looking at throwing out all the convictions as the police department allows a tolerance from the speed limit - in affect setting a new sped limit. And that, according to state law is something they cannot do. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

If the tickets are tossed, then the city is subject to refunding all the money collected - including the fees paid and may face additional costs and be liable for lawsuits.

Might be an interesting defense. Asking who authorized the change in speed limits if the camera didn't trigger until you were 11 over?

--
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet

vote 'em out!

grush wrote:
jimcaulfield wrote:

Well, at least a couple of people (link to that article) on the city counsel, had enough sense to vote against such a monstrosity!

The citizens of that area need to note the 5 that voted to put up the cams, and make sure they vote against them in the next election. Hurrah for the two that voted against it.

Vote the bums OUT, that's what I say!!!

--
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680

Yeah, vote them out ! ! !

jimcaulfield wrote:
grush wrote:
jimcaulfield wrote:

Well, at least a couple of people (link to that article) on the city counsel, had enough sense to vote against such a monstrosity!

The citizens of that area need to note the 5 that voted to put up the cams, and make sure they vote against them in the next election. Hurrah for the two that voted against it.

Vote the bums OUT, that's what I say!!!

How is it that we keep complaining sorely about the mess we're in while statistically we keep re-electing the incumbents [the SAME people] most of the time?!?!

I say vote the BUMS out, too!

--
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--

Folks...

squirrelproductions wrote:

"An increasing number of motorists in California are doing their research and challenging red-light camera tickets in court. Many have been successful in fighting these tickets. Several of those who were convicted, have appealed their conviction and got it overturned based on the city's failure to comply with the California vehicle code. There are three basic defenses which motorists have used sucessfully to beat these tickets:

* Duration of the yellow light
* Legal Notification required to motorists
* Illegal Contigency Fee Contracts Used By Cities"

Read the rest of the article at: http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypage.php?did=12331

watch my lips.."It's all about money!" not about running red lights, same with the cell phone law, as well as the seatbelt laws...it's all about money in the end. I've been a resident of California for over sixty-three years!

--
"Backward, turn backward, oh time in your flight, make me a child again, just for tonight."

CA sale tax vs WA sale tax

CA sale tax is 7.75%
WA sale tax is 9.0% and will going up soon
GA sale tax some counties only 5.5% to 6.0%
OR and Alaska sale tax is 0%. OR have the highest unemployment in the states and you don't wanna move to Alsaka. :->>

Sales Tax

stevennguyen wrote:

CA sale tax is 7.75%
WA sale tax is 9.0% and will going up soon
GA sale tax some counties only 5.5% to 6.0%
OR and Alaska sale tax is 0%. OR have the highest unemployment in the states and you don't wanna move to Alsaka. :->>

When I was in California the county I was in had a .5% tax making the sales tax rate 8.25%. Washington sales tax is 6.5% but local jurisdictions add to it making it 7%-9.5% depending which county you are in.

CO sales tax

Colorado brags about having one of the lowest sales tax in the country at 2.9 percent. They don't tell you that this applies to food items also.

What they also don't tell you is that there are other sales taxes. In the Denver suburb where I live, for instance, this includes Regional Transportation District (1.0 percent), Football Stadium District (0.1 percent), Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (0.1 percent), County sales tax (1.0 percent), and City sales tax (3.0 percent).

That brings the total to a whopping 8.1 percent. AND we have state income tax.

When I lived in Washington, I paid NO state income tax, the total sales tax was 8.3 percent, and it did not apply to food.

--
nüvi 750 & 760

Equitable?

jwt873 wrote:

That would be a more equitable means of 'grabbing cash'.

The politicians wouldn't dare. If the constituents realized how much taxes they pay, they'd throw the bums out.

That's why they try to come up with a way to collect money from "someone else." rolleyes

--
nüvi 750 & 760

You guys must have _the_

You guys must have _the_ most complicated tax system in the world, all the way from the IRS to the "Football Stadium District"? Unbelievable. smile

As I said....

it's only about the $$$$$$$$. News today in California: "Red light cameras bring in handsome profits but, do they improve safety"? NO IDIOTS, it improves coffers!

--
"Backward, turn backward, oh time in your flight, make me a child again, just for tonight."

Red Light Cameras in Gwinnett County GA

Link below is an article that indicated falling revenue is making red light cameras unprofitable in certain areas of Metro Atlanta. While there is some indication of effectiveness, it has resulted in diminished revenue.

http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSec...

bump-

bump-

--
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--

California Taxes?? Try registering a new vehicle in Arizona!!

My license plates (one year) for my diesel pickup to pull my 5th wheel cost over $2,000.00 (that's after you pay the sales tax which is equivalent to California) The plates for my daily driver were $1,700.00!

The plates go down in price each year (slightly) and bottom out after about 25 years or something like that (never had a car that long).

Arizona has now gotten in bed with that company that provides the fixed position speed cameras (about every 2 miles) on the freeways. My last trip to Phoenix I encountered their new SUV mounted speed cameras that get traffic in both directions with about 8 cameras on tripods hidden in the weeds in the middle of the roadway.

I'm seriously considering moving out of AZ due to all this government intrusion & money-grubbing politicians.

Check and Check....

That is what they are doing.... Sales tax up last month and license fees up next month...

All in all, I STILL would rather live in CA. smile

INFO ON FIGHTING CAMERA TICKETS

I agree, do the research and fight. Do not automaticlly roll over and pay the exhorbitant fines. As said before cameras cannot exercise judgment, if you are outside the set parameters even by a very small margin you get cited. I was driving on major street, 4 lanes in each direction seperated by an island, speed limit 45 mph, had a green light, was turning right, slowed and checked for traffic, there was none, made my right turn and got a ticket in the mail 10 days later. I never saw a yellow or the red, or the camera for that matter. I was a whopping .14 of a second late (140) millseconds. It takes approximatly 100 milliseconds to blink. Went back to that intersection later and timed the yellow light, it was 3 seconds, which I believe is the minimum allowed by law. I fought this ticket (fine $439) and it was dismissed. Lots of good info on this website http://www.highwayrobbery.net/
You do not even have to appear in court, can file a trial by declaration in most misdemenor traffic citations. Help in that area is available at www.2fixyourtrafficticket.com I thank the webmasters of both of these sites very much for saving me some money and keeping this from my driving record.

--
Garmin Nuvi 2595 LMT Garmin RV 760 LMT

Of course they are.

jmkthird wrote:

it's only about the $$$$$$$$. News today in California: "Red light cameras bring in handsome profits but, do they improve safety"? NO IDIOTS, it improves coffers!

And you just figured that out? OF course, You may as well get use to them. They may be regulated as how close they can be and timed, but never go away.

Only you can prevent Traffic Enforcement Cameras, Be a educated voter and vote out the people that put them in.

--
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.

Vote out the people that put them in

You can vote them out but the cams still there. If you vote them out and void their laws, that can not be done.
Education is the key yes, so send e-mails with proof that red light cams in the city and all over the states don`t do what they intend to do...which is safer intersections.
Don`t be naive revenue is the objective not safety.

--
Gps! ask where to go and get there! Best of all, what we need is to have accurate pois to reach all destinations

Or do both!!

Falcao wrote:

You can vote them out but the cams still there. If you vote them out and void their laws, that can not be done.
Education is the key yes, so send e-mails with proof that red light cams in the city and all over the states don`t do what they intend to do...which is safer intersections.
Don`t be naive revenue is the objective not safety.

With voters being so mad, I would think there would be some politicians using 'no red light cameras' as a platform soon. Maybe we can vote out those who put them in, vote in those who promise to take them out, and prove they don't work for safety all at the same time. (I can dream, can't I?)

If both, more power to the voter

More power to you, and YES you can dream, dreaming for a better and safer roads without being afraid of the flashes.

lol idea

--
Gps! ask where to go and get there! Best of all, what we need is to have accurate pois to reach all destinations

Revenue

This article about the Governor of Ct. pushing for traffic cameras shows that it's all about the revenue.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/22/2206.asp

BTW, the Ct. legislature shot down the idea:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/connecticut-rejects-speed-c...

revinue

its all about revenue, its nice to know that at least some are able to beat them.

yes

lugnuts wrote:

its all about revenue, its nice to know that at least some are able to beat them.

Ditto!

--
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680

swarzinegger

Tuckahoemike wrote:

The only way to solve California's problem is for them to drastically reduce state spending. More taxes only make the problem worse.

get rid of Swarzinegger.. he learned how to bankrupt a corporation from Ken Lay..

--
Nuvi 3760LMT & Nuvi 750, Nuvi 755T Cobra 9980 radar detector

WOW!

nansoutey wrote:
Tuckahoemike wrote:

The only way to solve California's problem is for them to drastically reduce state spending. More taxes only make the problem worse.

get rid of Swarzinegger.. he learned how to bankrupt a corporation from Ken Lay..

Whatta complete mess!!!

--
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--

Pretty screwwwed up, huh!!!

Pretty screwwwed up, huh!!!

--
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680

Thanks.

Good stuff - very helpful.

--
RKF (Bethesda, MD) Garmin Nuvi 660, 360 & Street Pilot

fighting a ticket

I fought a ticket last year and won..but you really have to Want to fight it. They make it so you have to appear at least 2 times.. so for me that = 2 partial personal days off work. I spent 2 hrs in the court room each time, Listening to people get 6 months license suspension for DUI...and Not having insurance. and...possession of marijuana.. I am glad I did it But It was a real eye opener of the court system..

--
Dave_ Nuvi 660 , 760,1490LMT Wooster, Ohio

Maybe for revenue but

If you do not go through a red light you will not contribute to the system. I have seen all too many accidents because some idiot was in a bigger hurry then everyone else and went through a red light and nearly hit another vehicle or pedestrian. I have been a near victim myself of red light runners. Yes the machine does not give much judgement and if it is close you should be able to argue your case in court and win if you are right. But if a person goes through red light on purpose you should be fined just as though a cop was sitting there. In GA it is illegal to go through a yellow light. So if the light is yellow and you continue through one of these RLC intersections you should get a ticket. If you stop and get hit from behind, guess what. The idiot behind you was following to close. My self I do not try to beat the light. If it is yellow I'm getting ready to stop. If I'm behind someone as I'm approaching an intersection I will assume they will stop so that I do not rear end them. it's all common sense and very few people use it these days which is why government needs to put out idiot laws, RLC, and radar cameras.

In GA we now have a "Super Speeder" law. If you are doing 85 in a 70 or lower it is an automatic $300 extra on top of the speeding fine. Plus mandatory court and I believe suspension of the drivers license.

Just like cell phones and driving. I see so many people that are slowing down or weaving all over the road while talking on a cell phone because they can't do both. Their brain just cannot handle it. Now these same people want to text and drive. So now we have laws being pushed through to make this illegal and it should be common sense. Admittedly I talk on the phone using hands free, which sometimes is not much better, but I keep it as short as possible. If I have write something down I pull over.

In short, if you obey the law and use common sense to stay within the law you will not contribute to the coffers of our corrupted government.

Crazy rules

wknight40 wrote:

In GA it is illegal to go through a yellow light. So if the light is yellow and you continue through one of these RLC intersections you should get a ticket.

That's insane. Isn't the whole point of a yellow light to warn the motorist? If you're twenty feet from the intersection (and you're being responsible and going a little under the speed limit) and it turns yellow, even slamming the brakes won't stop you in time--e.g., if the speed limit is 45 mph, that's 66 feet/second; even if you have superhuman reaction time, there's no way you can avoid going through the yellow.

Yes, I agree-

Yes, I agree-

--
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--

Absolutely

Vanderdecker wrote:
wknight40 wrote:

In GA it is illegal to go through a yellow light. So if the light is yellow and you continue through one of these RLC intersections you should get a ticket.

That's insane. Isn't the whole point of a yellow light to warn the motorist? If you're twenty feet from the intersection (and you're being responsible and going a little under the speed limit) and it turns yellow, even slamming the brakes won't stop you in time--e.g., if the speed limit is 45 mph, that's 66 feet/second; even if you have superhuman reaction time, there's no way you can avoid going through the yellow.

Absolutely agree, and good to know about GA. It's over-reactive, idiotic regulations like this and the documented cases of jurisdictions tampering with timing and placement that causes the resentment of the cameras.

At some point (rapidly approaching imo) the baby (safety effect of the cameras) is going to be thrown out with the bath water (cameras gone due to illegal contracts, public outcry). Those that are advocates of keeping the cameras should do everyone a favor and be proactive in helping to eliminate the profit motives and bad engineering whenever they see them (and there are PLENTY of documented cases by neutral observers).

Anyone remember overlapping red lights? There are still places where traffic flow wouldn't be impacted if a reasonably timed (>3 sec) yellow was followed by a red in BOTH directions before the cross traffic gets a green. Use a camera there, and go with a three strikes & your license is gone if the timing itself proves not to reduce incidents (accurate & transparent stats, please).

The feds already know that for 90% of drivers 2.5 seconds is a reasonable reaction time. That in itself is almost one urban lane width (12 ft) at 45 mph.

I haven't had a ticket of any sort in 25 years, but then again my area only tickets you if you ENTER on RED (the way it should be, imo).

--
It's about the Line- If a line can be drawn between the powers granted and the rights retained, it would seem to be the same thing, whether the latter be secured by declaring that they shall not be abridged, or that the former shall not be extended.

Not sure about that Cause/Effect myself

stevennguyen wrote:

CA sale tax is 7.75%
WA sale tax is 9.0% and will going up soon
GA sale tax some counties only 5.5% to 6.0%
OR and Alaska sale tax is 0%. OR have the highest unemployment in the states and you don't wanna move to Alsaka. :->>

Ha ha. Don't be so sure about that (sales in this case) tax 'kool-aid' that's always offered up to justify more.

Most places in Alaska require air travel to get to, and more importantly to the issue of the economic welfare and unemployment of it's citizens I offer that and this as my theory for the primary reason:
http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/06/17/291-federal-land...

--
It's about the Line- If a line can be drawn between the powers granted and the rights retained, it would seem to be the same thing, whether the latter be secured by declaring that they shall not be abridged, or that the former shall not be extended.