Advice on Infringement Notice

cowboy · 10-10-2008, 01:33 PM

Here's what happened.

I attended the Deniliquin ute muster last weekend in the old XD. After I arrived I backed into a parking spot in the paddock and a few guys heard the idle on the old girl and called out to give it a rev. I gave it a few revs for maybe 5 to 10 seconds. Next thing a police officer appears at my window and books me for "start/drive vehicle causing unecessary noise/smoke". $243 and 3 points. I would point out here thet the vehicle was stationary, I was not spinning the wheels or anything and the XD does NOT blow smoke.

Now I would cop this on the chin if I had been is a carpark somewhere or a suburban street but this was in a paddock at a festival started to celebrate the V8 ute. I observed probably 50 or 60 other utes do the same thing and much worse over the weekend, at times within sight of police officers and not get done.

I am going to write a letter and appeal this infringement, probably have no chance but I have to try. Any advice for what I should include?

ch33z1l · 10-10-2008, 01:41 PM

I got no advice mate, but damn that is rough! To create excess noise over those concert speakers that the Living End would be playing over, the XD must go alright!

Busted · 10-10-2008, 01:42 PM

A photo of the ute showing that it was off the street.
Get a rego inspection done and attach it to show that the vehicle is in a raodworthy con ie not to loud. (delete the inspection stations name from the form the last thing you need is for your inspection station to get an ordit).

Ozfords · 11-10-2008, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busted

(the last thing you need is for your inspection station to get an ordit).

Yes, the last thing they need is an ordit. It's about as bad as having your tax return orditted, or those annoying stationary ordits at work.

Dem pesky ordits.

geckoGT · 11-10-2008, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozfords

Yes, the last thing they need is an ordit. It's about as bad as having your tax return orditted, or those annoying stationary ordits at work.

Dem pesky ordits.

For a start, it is an audit (not ordit).

Secondly, no inspection station should have an issue with an audit or you using their inspection in legal matters, not if they are oing the job properly.

Somehow I doubt the car will pass exhaust noise testing so the whole testing idea is not a good plan. Taking into account that it occured at a closed automotive event, I do not think it will be necessary in order to get a magistrate to rule against the infringement. Like trying to dish out the same infringement in pit lane at bathurst

Flaming Mo · 11-10-2008, 10:06 PM

I'm not familiar with NSW legislation so I did a bit of a search. It would appear that while no doubt you were perhaps nabbed by an over zealous officer, technically it would appear that your actions constitute an offence.

In Section 11 of NSW Road Rules 2008, it states that the rules apply to vehicles and road users on roads and road related areas.
Section 13 provides for a definition of "road related area" which includes;
Subsection (d) - an area that is not a road and that is open to the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.

You could however possibly use the location and nature of the concert / meeting as a way of requesting a review of the infringement notice. I would perhaps argue that the spirit of this legislation was intended to protect the peace and tranquility of suburban streets and neighbourhoods - not necessarily outdoor motor shows and rock concerts.

It may not change the outcome but may be worth a try.

Supercharged · 11-10-2008, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaming Mo

I'm not familiar with NSW legislation so I did a bit of a search. It would appear that while no doubt you were perhaps nabbed by an over zealous officer, technically it would appear that your actions constitute an offence.

In Section 11 of NSW Road Rules 2008, it states that the rules apply to vehicles and road users on roads and road related areas.
Section 13 provides for a definition of "road related area" which includes;
Subsection (d) - an area that is not a road and that is open to the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.

You could however possibly use the location and nature of the concert / meeting as a way of requesting a review of the infringement notice. I would perhaps argue that the spirit of this legislation was intended to protect the peace and tranquility of suburban streets and neighbourhoods - not necessarily outdoor motor shows and rock concerts.

It may not change the outcome but may be worth a try.

Almost correct, a public open space (except the public road it’s self) is a Service Station driveway or a supermarket car park or similar, an area open to the public but still private land.
An area that is open to the public but has a gate or similar that is closed at least once a year is not a Public Open Space as such. Making excessive noise in a non-public open space doesn’t come under the traffic act and you cannot be fined under that law.
5 years ago I went to work in a blue uniform for 10 years

XR Martin · 12-10-2008, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

For a start, it is an audit (not ordit).

Secondly, no inspection station should have an issue with an audit or you using their inspection in legal matters, not if they are oing the job properly.

Obviously sarcasm was never your strong point

ltd · 12-10-2008, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozfords

Yes, the last thing they need is an ordit. It's about as bad as having your tax return orditted, or those annoying stationary ordits at work.

Dem pesky ordits.

Bawhahahahahahahahahahahaha, you made my day.

jaydee · 10-10-2008, 06:29 PM

Try and look up the regulation/section and see if it says it has to be on a road or an are open to and used by the public.

geckoGT · 10-10-2008, 06:48 PM

It does not have to be a on a public road, they could do you in your driveway if the neighbours complain. Having said that, the situation you got done sucks, getting done at a ute show?

I would fight it as I feel the magistrate would be against the use of these laws against people at automotive events that are sanctioned by the police and carry the correct liability insurance etc. If it was a carpark etc fair cop but not at a ute show/concert, would look brilliant in the news paper, certainly some negative publicity for the police.
Next time, don't go to an organised motoring enthusiasts event designed to prevent antisocial motoring behaviour from happening on the street, just do burn outs in the local shopping centre car park, same fine (before you all tell me off, that is sarcasm).

FPV GT40 · 10-10-2008, 08:00 PM

....sounds a bit rough getting a fine, that would be like getting a street racing fine at the drags....

Not sure how you would fight it but I would certainly not be happy.

snappy · 10-10-2008, 08:06 PM

Thats a joke i wish i had some advice for you . Good luck

Evil Roy · 11-10-2008, 12:50 PM

Let us know how you get on.

**ebxr8240** · 11-10-2008, 07:08 PM

Rep yourself in court with all the paperwork..
Some times I think writting in gives them info to
present their case against you...

gros20 · 12-10-2008, 12:15 AM

i don't know i fteh show was a local show for u. but i would write a letter to the paper no doubt witha bit of luck it will get in the paper and they will drop the fine.

I did this when me and my then partner went shoping to get odd and ends and amgainst it boughta box of condoms and was refused service at the counter cause we had soem condoms in the trolly.
any way paper picke up story then ity just snow balled and after taht wollies was very apolgtic. Even today tonight called up want teh story :p

Matty4 · 12-10-2008, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gros20

i don't know i fteh show was a local show for u. but i would write a letter to the paper no doubt witha bit of luck it will get in the paper and they will drop the fine.

I did this when me and my then partner went shoping to get odd and ends and amgainst it boughta box of condoms and was refused service at the counter cause we had soem condoms in the trolly.
any way paper picke up story then ity just snow balled and after taht wollies was very apolgtic. Even today tonight called up want teh story :p

:

ltd · 12-10-2008, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matty4

:

Complete gobbledigook. Someone get a translator and fast.

Most unintelligable post of the year perhaps?

Rodp · 12-10-2008, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gros20

i don't know i fteh show was a local show for u. but i would write a letter to the paper no doubt witha bit of luck it will get in the paper and they will drop the fine.

I did this when me and my then partner went shoping to get odd and ends and amgainst it boughta box of condoms and was refused service at the counter cause we had soem condoms in the trolly.
any way paper picke up story then ity just snow balled and after taht wollies was very apolgtic. Even today tonight called up want teh story :p

:

I think I've got it deciphered but that just raises more questions, apart from the most obvious one being... what relevance does it have to an infringement notice for noise?!

However, you went to a shop - bought some stuff including condoms and they didn't want to serve you because you attempted to buy condoms from them?

What's missing from this story that inspired a newspaper article and Today Tonight wanting to run it...?

xdclevo · 12-10-2008, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

What's missing from this story that inspired a newspaper article and Today Tonight wanting to run it...?

Mushy season for sure

Ridin-High · 12-10-2008, 03:20 AM

If you haven't had a fine for awhile or ever, might be an idea to make a written appeal

joolz · 12-10-2008, 08:30 PM

Im a bit confused here! So he booked you for excessive noise and he determined that from a distance? So if it was that excessive over the concert and other cars it must have been pretty loud and so why didnt he also put a canary on your car as the noise must have been that excessive it would also include sound pollution (EPA). It appears to me to be a flawed punishment from a police officer that has nothing better to do.

Flaming Mo · 14-10-2008, 11:35 AM

[B]13 What is a road related area
(1) A road related area is any of the following:
(a) an area that divides a road,
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and designated for use by cyclists or animals,
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to or used by the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.[B]

By simply reading the legislation, one could determine that the ute muster carpark satisfies the definition of "road related area" under section (d), which would perhaps be the criteria used by the officer who issued the ticket.

I think what FG Turbo Ute is saying (which may very lilkely be correct), is that the area in quetion, whether private or not, must be primarily developed for, or have as one of its main uses, the parking or use of vehicles for the public, which would not be the case with a paddock or oval. Would this be correct FG Turbo Ute?

Supercharged · 15-10-2008, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaming Mo

[B]13 What is a road related area
(1) A road related area is any of the following:
(a) an area that divides a road,
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and designated for use by cyclists or animals,
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to or used by the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.[B]

By simply reading the legislation, one could determine that the ute muster carpark satisfies the definition of "road related area" under section (d), which would perhaps be the criteria used by the officer who issued the ticket.

I think what FG Turbo Ute is saying (which may very lilkely be correct), is that the area in quetion, whether private or not, must be primarily developed for, or have as one of its main uses, the parking or use of vehicles for the public, which would not be the case with a paddock or oval. Would this be correct FG Turbo Ute?

(C) is a park with trees and the like, restricted but still public open space and normally public owned (Council or Crown)
(D) is a Car park, Sevice Station and the like,
Land that is private and is closed off at times to the public is not considered public open space (related area) , this has been tested in court before.

geckoGT · 16-10-2008, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaming Mo

[B]13 What is a road related area
(1) A road related area is any of the following:
(a) an area that divides a road,
(b) a footpath or nature strip adjacent to a road
(c) an area that is not a road and that is open to the public and designated for use by cyclists or animals,
(d) an area that is not a road and that is open to or used by the public for driving, riding or parking vehicles.[B]

By simply reading the legislation, one could determine that the ute muster carpark satisfies the definition of "road related area" under section (d), which would perhaps be the criteria used by the officer who issued the ticket.

I think what FG Turbo Ute is saying (which may very lilkely be correct), is that the area in quetion, whether private or not, must be primarily developed for, or have as one of its main uses, the parking or use of vehicles for the public, which would not be the case with a paddock or oval. Would this be correct FG Turbo Ute?

From what I understand of this so far, the law is enforceable in a road related area, am I correct?

If this is the case, at the ute muster it was on a paddock which is not a road related area (need to remember it was not in a car park), so therefore the law does not apply.

Flaming Mo · 16-10-2008, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geckoGT

From what I understand of this so far, the law is enforceable in a road related area, am I correct?

If this is the case, at the ute muster it was on a paddock which is not a road related area (need to remember it was not in a car park), so therefore the law does not apply.

You may have misinterpreted my post. If you re-read the last paragraph, you will see that I specified that FG Turbo Ute may in fact be correct in that the law may not be applied in the case of a paddock or oval, as the paddock is not primarily developed for parking, or regularly used by the public.

The other paragraph was suggesting that the officer, mistaken or otherwise, may have interpreted the area as enforceable, as at that specific time of the incident, the paddock was in fact "an area that is not a road that is open to or used by the public for parking vehicles" (Section d), although only temporary.

As the legislation does not make provisions for the terms "temporary" or "permanent" in describing areas of parking or even the term "carpark" for that matter, if the officer was unfamiliar with specific court judgements relating to these issues, he may well have believed in error, that the area was enforceable because it was a designated area used for public parking at the time.

Hope this reads a little better.

Supercharged · 16-10-2008, 11:52 PM

In short, he was booked under the wrong law (act), they will not give in easily.
Drink driving you can be booked anywhere.
There are all sorts of thing that go on. In 1995 the Commissioner of Transport (Tasmania) authorised the Council parking officers to be able to fine people for parking offences like loading zones, bus stops, no standing and no parking areas (other than parking meters and car parks as that falls under the Highway Act which they could always do).
It was discovered in 2003 that the Commissioner could only authorise persons under his/her direct control which meant employed by departments under the commissioners control not Councils, they had been booking people without the correct authority.
They amended the Act on 03-09-2003 to correct this, when I left the Government I let the local paper know and they found out that it was correct, thousands of people were fined illegally, nothing happened, it wasn’t printed as there were millions of dollars involved which would have to be refunded, I should have contacted someone like Today Tonight but it is too long ago now.

geckoGT · 17-10-2008, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FG Turbo Ute

In short, he was booked under the wrong law (act), they will not give in easily.
Drink driving you can be booked anywhere.
There are all sorts of thing that go on. In 1995 the Commissioner of Transport (Tasmania) authorised the Council parking officers to be able to fine people for parking offences like loading zones, bus stops, no standing and no parking areas (other than parking meters and car parks as that falls under the Highway Act which they could always do).
It was discovered in 2003 that the Commissioner could only authorise persons under his/her direct control which meant employed by departments under the commissioners control not Councils, they had been booking people without the correct authority.
They amended the Act on 03-09-2003 to correct this, when I left the Government I let the local paper know and they found out that it was correct, thousands of people were fined illegally, nothing happened, it wasn’t printed as there were millions of dollars involved which would have to be refunded, I should have contacted someone like Today Tonight but it is too long ago now.

Sounds like one call to the media and a lot of people would have been very happy.

ch33z1l · 16-10-2008, 11:29 AM

Does that mean at the Ute Muster, you can receive an infringment for public intoxication, considering it is on public grounds....lol

What a croc! Id be writing a letter for sure.

geckoGT · 16-10-2008, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ch33z1l

Does that mean at the Ute Muster, you can receive an infringment for public intoxication, considering it is on public grounds....lol

What a croc! Id be writing a letter for sure.

For the duration it will have a license for the sale of alcohol if it is served there. Having said that it is and offence to sell alcohol to an intoxicated person on a licensed premises, so it would be an offense but under different laws to public consumption of alcohol.