4teecal

In the end they can ask you and seek consent, but ultimately they can enter into and inspect any vehicle for mechanical defects. The illegality of your mates search may have stemmed from other issues related to specific search powers under certain acts.

It would have to be determined by a court.

Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 2008 Current version for 28 September 2009 to date (accessed 27 December 2009 at 14:48) Part 3Division 2Subdivision 3Clause 32 << page >> 32 High performance vehicle restrictions (cf cl 15B 1999 Reg) (1) In addition to any other conditions that may be attached to a provisional licence, such a licence (other than a motorcycle licence) is subject to the condition that the holder must not drive a high performance vehicle. (2) For the purposes of this clause, a high performance vehicle is a vehicle: (a) with an engine having 8 or more cylinders, or (b) the engine of which is turbocharged or supercharged (other than a diesel powered vehicle), or © that has had any substantial modification made to the engine of the vehicle to increase the performance of the vehicle (not being a modification made by the manufacturer of the vehicle in the course of manufacture of the vehicle), or (d) that has had any modification made to the vehicle that is listed for the time being in the Authority’s publication Novice Driver—High performance vehicle restrictions as a high performance modification for the purposes of this clause, or (e) that is listed for the time being in the Authority’s publication Novice Driver—High performance vehicle restrictions as a high performance vehicle for the purposes of this clause. (3) A vehicle is not a high performance vehicle for the purposes of this clause if it is listed for the time being in the Authority’s publication Novice Driver—High performance vehicle restrictions as a vehicle that is not a high performance vehicle. (4) This clause applies only to a provisional licence issued after 16 December 2005 and applies only if: (a) the person to whom the licence is issued had not held a provisional licence at any time before that date, or (b) the person to whom the licence is issued had held a provisional licence at a time before that date and the licence issued after that date is issued after a disqualification for an offence committed on or after 11 July 2005. (5) Nothing in subclause (4) affects a condition imposed on a provisional licence under clause 15B of the Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Regulation 1999 on or before 16 December 2005. (6) The Authority’s publication Novice Drivers—High Performance Vehicle Restrictions is to be published on the Authority’s website and is to be available for perusal free of charge at each motor registry.

Never trust websites. I go straight to to relevent act or regulation and read the law in black and white. I know it is accurate.

Nope, sorry it has not been changed.

If you want to dispute false advertising take it to a small claims tribunal or the ACC, not a local court. It is not written in legislation so it is not a law or regulation. It is a guideline or advice Of course they are different. So were the old mobile speed cameras, bus lane cameras and old red light cameras. They are still legislated exactly the same. Case law is created by setting a precident at a minimum district cout level. Read though Austlii and you will find we have case law in Australia. Of course there will be signs. They use them as a deterrent. I wont be waiting wiht baited breath as both Roadsafe, NRMA, Pedestrian Council and every other lobby group in Australia supports the use of signs. it still does not change the fact there is no legal obligation to signpost them, merely a moral one. It is not a defence that there is no sign.

Guidelines do not override laws in NSW. Exactly. That argument is like saying you will have a speeding ticket dismissed because a police officer was not wearing a reflective vest as his guidelines instruct him to do. It is not the case unless someone can show some case law where it has happened. It is just not a valid argument and would not be accepted by a court. Well actually they are. The offences are both stipulated in the Road Rules 2008. The use of both the devices are listed in the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999.

Sorry, They are modded then. You get a whole lot of extras. Drill holes in the dash and floor. Extra grippy brake discs due to increased friction of heats cracks Super loose auto transmission for faster shifts. Custom paint thanks to markings and rook lights. If you get the delux ones you my even get he high performance RBT tubes and rubber gloves stuff unders your punctured and sneakily plugged spare tyre.

About as far as mode went were the old BT9 packs on Holdens. Remove some soundproofing, removed gates from auto transmission, FE2 suspension and SS interior and shithouse steel 15 inch rims.. There never have been engine mods.

Bog standard SS or XR motors.

Because you can't carry two police, and all the gear in a small car. The higher performance cars are needed so they can catch up to vehicles. If you approach a car in a 100 zone that is doing 140 and then have to slow, wait for a gap, turn and then chase that car, you dont want to be doing it in a Corolla.

Riiiggggggghhhhhhhhhttttttttt.

A nun doing over 45 is committing the same offence as a mulitple murderer doing over 45. No cop is going to put their job on the line and be placed under scrutiny for not issuing the penalty. It is not their job to decide the punishment or to consider your soci-econimic status. That is set by courts and governments. They merely enforce the law and when doing so they have guidelines they HAVE to follow. PS. I have only just read the bit where they got you on Lidar. I was thinking ti was purely radar. If it is Lidar, they got you well and truly before you even saw them.

About as far as police control went was the managers looking after the vehicle fitouts. As stated. The towing and storage of the cars is purely private sector. Police were there from 9-5 and then it is anyones guess. It was never police property.

I was just going off his location of Northen Beaches. Yes country imounds are different.

"Cops" only do the paperwork and confiscate the car. It is towed by tow companies and stored by private contractors. They detail the stuff about he car before it gets taken away an thats the last they ever see of it. Hrdly their fault. You might want to take it up with other people.

Mybe it justs points out that traffic offenders are stupider than most break and enter offenders. Never a truer word spoken.

Good son of rajab. Internet legal advice!!!!!!! Speed estimation is a legitimate method and used commonly. It is accepted by courts. It all comes don to how the officer presents his evidence and whether they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the offence was committed. Dont worry. The detectives etc look after than. HWP look after traffic. Thats is why the police have all these wonderful departments to do different jobs.

Save yourself the time and trouble and go and view the in car video before you bother going to court. The suspension notice is a police suspension, and is automatic from the time of the offence. Not signing it makes no difference. You licence would already be suspended on the RTA system Bollocks. Do not drive.......You risk being charged with another offence.

You weren't a P plater at the time. You were a suspended driver. . Don't get caught again. Magistrates really hate people driving whilst disqualified.

Actually courts disqualify you. RTA/Police deal out cacellations and suspensions. Signifigance being a much harsher penalty imposed for driving whilst disqualified as it is a court order.

Mandatory 3 months off the road for any speed for a P1 licence. She then loses it for a further 3 months for demerit points.

Take the advice of your solicitor. Police already have prima facie evidence as soon as they present the device. He then presents his expertise and the video and you are toast. Too many crusaders who try to prove points clog up the court system. It does not worry the police. They are paid to be there and it does not worry the solicitor. He will happily take your thousand dollars to defend a $300 fine. It is the system that suffers. Proving a point is only costly to one person. The one trying to prove a point.

Maybe better if I clarify it with an example. You joint register a car with your brother. He gets caught twice. You stand to lose your car.