$10 Million Red Light Camera Caught With Short Yellow
Fri, 07/05/2013 - 3:55am
 16 years
|
One of the most profitable red light camera intersections in Virginia Beach, Virginia has been pulling in millions based from faulty engineering. The automated ticketing machine at the corner of Great Neck Road and Virginia Beach Boulevard generated $10 million worth of red light camera tickets, only to see profits tumble 64 percent when the yellow signal timing was extended by half-a-second in January.
...
"Computer records obtained from the city via public records requests show that, as of January 10, 2013 at 5 PM, the red light camera system had issued a total of 199,463 citations," Bahen said. "Analysis revealed that 51,417 of them would not have been issued had the yellow change intervals been ITE-timed from the outset."
Can you say the words "Class
Can you say the words "Class Action Suiit?."
Fred
--Yes I can!
--Yes I can!
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680
Why should it take a
Why should it take a class-action lawsuit to compensate the victims of this scam. They have a record of every ticket "written" by that camera. The fines should be returned to these drivers immediately along with any insurance surcharges or rate increases that resulted. This is the only way these state-sponsored robberies will stop.
"Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
$$$$$
Can you say "Money"? as long as you won't force them to return the money, it will never happen!!!
Because
Because they not only owe money back for the false tichets, but they owe big money for being the thieves they are. If you fine the hell out of them for doing it, they won't do it in the future!
That's why more than returning the ticketed money is important.
Fred
Your point is well taken
I agree, but a class-action suit means years of delay and waiting with the result that the laywers clean up and the court ends up giving everyone else about $3.00 instead of what they actually shelled out in fines and surcharges.
Because they not only owe money back for the false tichets, but they owe big money for being the thieves they are. If you fine the hell out of them for doing it, they won't do it in the future!
That's why more than returning the ticketed money is important.
Fred
"Primum Non Nocere" 2595LMT Clear Channel and Navteq Traffic
As is almost always the case..
with RLC it is about the money. Safety is a smokescreen. I'm not against people being punished but time after time reports come out that the lights were manipulated to increase number of tickets.
Whether the lawyers make
Whether the lawyers make money or not doesn't bother me. What's important is that the operators of the cameras & the State pay humongous fines. Only that will prevent their theft in the future.
Fred
What a Scam
Not surprised at all. What a scam!
So How Many Tickets Were Valid?
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
Cue Capt. Renault
A red light camera had a short yellow?
"I am shocked. Shocked ....."
RLC
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
If their intent was purely legit, why tweak with the timing of the yellow? Does the end justify the means?
yea ...
A red light camera had a short yellow?
"I am shocked. Shocked ....."
imagine that .....
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .
How shocking. I was
How shocking. I was expecting them to shorten the yellow by another second or two now they figured out how to increase revenue.
what i love about "The newspaper"
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
If their intent was purely legit, why tweak with the timing of the yellow? Does the end justify the means?
What I love about the reports from The Newspaper is they very rarely tell any more than they need to fan the flames about these cameras. What we don't know, and, from the story and The Newspaper's history is the timing on the light was probably incorrect before the camera went up. If the timing had been changed either coincident with the installation or after installation they would have trumpeted that as well.
Illiterate? Write for free help.
somehow all red light cameras have shorter than normal yellow
somehow all red light cameras have shorter than normal yellow...
Garmin nuvi 2595LMT; Android 5.0 (Samsung GS3)
Benefit?
In many cases the camera companies cash in the fines. My question is then "Do they have access or permission to change the yellow timing?" If yes, why? If the city is cashing in, of course they can do what they want until they get caught. But even then, they usually use a contractor to maintain the traffic lights.
One way or the other, there is a collusion between the authority and one or more private company(ies). Disturbing!!!
What difference does it make?
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
If their intent was purely legit, why tweak with the timing of the yellow? Does the end justify the means?
What I love about the reports from The Newspaper is they very rarely tell any more than they need to fan the flames about these cameras. What we don't know, and, from the story and The Newspaper's history is the timing on the light was probably incorrect before the camera went up. If the timing had been changed either coincident with the installation or after installation they would have trumpeted that as well.
I would hope that part of the RLC camera installation procedure would include measuring the yellow light duration and verifying that it is correct and appropriate. It's negligence on the part of the RLC installers and local government not to do so. There is no valid excuse not to change an incorrect yellow duration when the RLC is installed.
Mark
Exactly!
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
If their intent was purely legit, why tweak with the timing of the yellow? Does the end justify the means?
What I love about the reports from The Newspaper is they very rarely tell any more than they need to fan the flames about these cameras. What we don't know, and, from the story and The Newspaper's history is the timing on the light was probably incorrect before the camera went up. If the timing had been changed either coincident with the installation or after installation they would have trumpeted that as well.
I would hope that part of the RLC camera installation procedure would include measuring the yellow light duration and verifying that it is correct and appropriate. It's negligence on the part of the RLC installers and local government not to do so. There is no valid excuse not to change an incorrect yellow duration when the RLC is installed.
Mark
Where I come from, there are supposedly "studies" that take place before the installation of red light cameras. Wouldn't the timing of the yellow light be known before the cash register, I mean, cameras are installed? If not, that is highly negligent, let alone suspect.
About time... I hate it when
About time... I hate it when the yellow light changes so quickly!
Money, Money, Money
I see green!!!
Val - Nuvi 785t and Streetpilot C340
$10 Million Dollars
All the money should be refunded!!!!!!
Alan-Garmin c340
Ban them
This potential for rigging of the yellow lights is yet another reason why these ticketing cameras should be banned. Short of that, I do everything I can to avoid going near them.
Hard To Do
This potential for rigging of the yellow lights is yet another reason why these ticketing cameras should be banned. Short of that, I do everything I can to avoid going near them.
Unfortunately, the few I do pass through I have no choice as bypassing them is really not an option unless I want to add ten or more minutes to a trip. The one thing I refuse to do at an RLC is make a right-on-red, even if it is legal. I do not trust the system in place. Do they snag you for one second? Three seconds? Did the "No Turn On Red" sign mysteriously disappear, like the RLC warning signs? Even if you are in the right, you still have to go to court and fight it which means a day off from work. As such, I would rather wait and hold up a line of cars than get snagged and have to go for my day in court and most likely lose.
When RLC's where first proposed around here I was opposed to them. Then, within the span of about a week after they started rolling them out around here, I had three incidents with red-light runners that made me change my mind. The worst was in Suffolk County at NY-109 and Great East Neck Road. The light turned green, I waited about one to two seconds to proceed as I usually do, and as I entered the large intersection, a car plowed right through on a red missing me by about six inches. The idiot didn't even slow down afterwords and just kept going. It was very much like "Accident 6" on this county video page at http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/TPVA/rlc-accidents.ht... as I was not hig either. Well after the light was red, the car in the video went through and just tapped the brake.
I support the right to keep and arm bears.
--me too
You can read this story another way. It says that almost 146,000 of the tickets issued were valid. That's a lot of people going through a red light or making an illegal turn.
If their intent was purely legit, why tweak with the timing of the yellow? Does the end justify the means?
What I love about the reports from The Newspaper is they very rarely tell any more than they need to fan the flames about these cameras. What we don't know, and, from the story and The Newspaper's history is the timing on the light was probably incorrect before the camera went up. If the timing had been changed either coincident with the installation or after installation they would have trumpeted that as well.
I would hope that part of the RLC camera installation procedure would include measuring the yellow light duration and verifying that it is correct and appropriate. It's negligence on the part of the RLC installers and local government not to do so. There is no valid excuse not to change an incorrect yellow duration when the RLC is installed.
Mark
Where I come from, there are supposedly "studies" that take place before the installation of red light cameras. Wouldn't the timing of the yellow light be known before the cash register, I mean, cameras are installed? If not, that is highly negligent, let alone suspect.
I completely concur!!!
~Jim~ Nuvi-660, & Nuvi-680
good point
This potential for rigging of the yellow lights is yet another reason why these ticketing cameras should be banned. Short of that, I do everything I can to avoid going near them.
Unfortunately, the few I do pass through I have no choice as bypassing them is really not an option unless I want to add ten or more minutes to a trip. The one thing I refuse to do at an RLC is make a right-on-red, even if it is legal. I do not trust the system in place. Do they snag you for one second? Three seconds? Did the "No Turn On Red" sign mysteriously disappear, like the RLC warning signs? Even if you are in the right, you still have to go to court and fight it which means a day off from work. As such, I would rather wait and hold up a line of cars than get snagged and have to go for my day in court and most likely lose.
When RLC's where first proposed around here I was opposed to them. Then, within the span of about a week after they started rolling them out around here, I had three incidents with red-light runners that made me change my mind. The worst was in Suffolk County at NY-109 and Great East Neck Road. The light turned green, I waited about one to two seconds to proceed as I usually do, and as I entered the large intersection, a car plowed right through on a red missing me by about six inches. The idiot didn't even slow down afterwords and just kept going. It was very much like "Accident 6" on this county video page at http://www.nassaucountyny.gov/agencies/TPVA/rlc-accidents.ht... as I was not hig either. Well after the light was red, the car in the video went through and just tapped the brake.
You make a good point. While we all know that there will always be those who violate these intersections outright, I do not believe for even a single second that any where near 146,000 people actually did anything worthy of their "valid" tickets. And while I do not in any way blame you for avoiding an unnecessary ticket by holding us all up until you make your right turn after the light turns green, it definitely takes a substantial toll out of the efficiency of everything when considering how many RLC intersections there are multiplied by how many times an hour this is repeated, with out (in most every case) making anything any safer in any way, given that most every time one makes a free right after a brief stop they have also looked to see that no one else is coming along to collide with them.
These RLC's are an illegitimate scourge upon society, plain and simple! It is all about gouging us (the public) for money, and never about true safety but (to borrow a well fitting phrase from Friside007's post above) only uses the issue of safety for a smokescreen.
Ban them, ban them ALL from coast to coast, and STOP re-electing anyone who is for them!
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--
That's an awful lot of money
That's an awful lot of money for one light to generate.Wonder how many more similar light there are!
an94
Probably alot
That's an awful lot of money for one light to generate.Wonder how many more similar light there are!
They are all there to collect money from motorists, so I would suspect that there are quite a few.
Let's ask the municipalities!
I would hope that part of the RLC camera installation procedure would include measuring the yellow light duration and verifying that it is correct and appropriate. It's negligence on the part of the RLC installers and local government not to do so. There is no valid excuse not to change an incorrect yellow duration when the RLC is installed.
Mark
Let's ask the municipalities operating the cameras, they're always forthcoming with data under the Freedom of Information Act, right?
http://www.mddriversalliance.org/2013/01/some-local-governme...
Revenue makers, pure and
Revenue makers, pure and simple. There's no other reason for their being and unless we're vocal about our objection to them? there's no way they're going away. I have a friend that owns a service station on a red light camera intersection and he's seen a dramatic increase in accidents there since the camera's install. There's a car getting rear ended there almost daily, a rare occurrence before the camera's install. Yet when studies are done on the red light camera's here (Nassau County NY)? The county always claims there's no increase in accidents in the intersections covered by camera's. The camera's also a very big money maker, capturing anyone who doesn't come to a complete 3 sec stop on a right on red. I wonder if the revenue has anything to do with the study? Nah! The government would never lie!
Lost on LI
NICE
Can you say the words "Class Action Suiit?."
Fred
Would be nice, but would need a LOT of proof and after class action everyone would get about $3.00 LOL
[URL=http://www.speedtest.net][IMG]http://www.speedtest.net/result/693683800.png[/IMG][/URL]
already done
Can you say the words "Class Action Suiit?."
Fred
Would be nice, but would need a LOT of proof and after class action everyone would get about $3.00 LOL
once, there was a thread on it a while back, someone in cary, NC sued that the formula used to compute the yellow(amber) light interval was wrong. there might be a second one going on for tickets issued for a legal left turn on red(blinking yellow left turn arrow)
Red light camera night mares for cities
Stories where cameras cost the cities more than they were bringing in
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/10-crazy-red-light-camera-cases-...
Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things!
don't forget about the
Can you say the words "Class Action Suiit?."
Fred
Would be nice, but would need a LOT of proof and after class action everyone would get about $3.00 LOL
Don't forget about the lawyers who file said class action suit. While everyone owed gets their "$3.oo", the law firm will divide about $27-million of the proceeds neatly between the 3 (or so) law-partners!
That would be fair to everybody, wouldn't it???
nightrider --Nuvi's 660 & 680--
If You Are Lucky
Can you say the words "Class Action Suiit?."
Fred
Would be nice, but would need a LOT of proof and after class action everyone would get about $3.00 LOL
Don't forget about the lawyers who file said class action suit. While everyone owed gets their "$3.oo", the law firm will divide about $27-million of the proceeds neatly between the 3 (or so) law-partners!
That would be fair to everybody, wouldn't it???
These days, you will get the $3.00 IF you are lucky. The New York Times ran an article this week, on August 13th, at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/us/supreme-court-may-hear-... that talks about a new class action practice emerging where the lawyers and defendant cut a deal and the "class" gets left out of the settlement. Perfectly legal so far. The wonderful thing is members of the "class" have already surrendered their rights so they cannot even go back and sue separately. This is an excerpt from the article:
WASHINGTON — “We always knew this settlement would get a tremendous amount of attention,” Scott A. Kamber told the federal appeals court in San Francisco a couple of years ago.
He was defending a novel bargain he had struck with Facebook on behalf of millions of users whose privacy he said the company had violated. The settlement’s central innovation was to cut Mr. Kamber’s clients out of the deal.
The class members would get nothing. The plaintiffs’ lawyers would get about $2.3 million. Facebook would make a roughly $6.5 million payment — to a new foundation it would partly control.
The appeals court upheld the settlement last year by a 2-to-1 vote, with the majority saying it was “fair, adequate and free from collusion.” Last month, critics of the settlement asked the Supreme Court to hear the case.
The Facebook settlement certainly explores new frontiers in class-action creativity. For starters, consider the plaintiffs.
“They do not get one cent,” Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld wrote in dissent. “They do not even get an injunction against Facebook doing exactly the same thing to them again.”
In exchange for nothing, the plaintiffs gave up their right to sue Facebook and its partners in a program called Beacon, which automatically, and alarmingly, displayed their purchases and video rentals. The program has been shuttered, but its legal legacy lives on.
I support the right to keep and arm bears.
I'm sure no one making money off of this ever suspected a thing.
Awesome
Thanks for the news..
Right on red
If I read this correctly 92% of the tickets were issued for right on red and the article states they were made safely. It's not about safety, it's always about revenue generation.