Police Correspondence

[Nene260RS]

Hi Everyone,

As most of you are aware, a couple months ago it was decided to send an Email to Constable Neil from The Port Adelaide Police Department. This was due to the fact 2 squad cars pulled up to an SAU cruise, and commenced under the hood inspections to every car.

The Following email was sent by my self to Neil :

Hi Neil,

As you can probably imagine, since our conversation at the Stagea cruise on Sunday, there has been detailed discussion about our willingness to work with the police when it comes to our Skylines Australia Cruises. Most of the conversations carried out by Members have been positive, But to really make this arrangement work, there are a few points that SAU would like questioned.

Some of the points brought up by our members include:

*Would You be content to merely show a presence at cruise events and, providing people are behaving, allow cruises to proceed without conducting defect blitzes, compiling registration lists, and other general negative stereotype behavior.

*What happens when you, (being our main contact for cruises) is not on duty on one of our cruise nights? Will your fellow officers share the same amount of tolerance? Also, after we depart from our meet point, will other officers know of our partnership in keeping South Australia's roads safe?

Myself along with some Valued Skylines Australia Members are very keen to set up a meeting, So we can chat face to face and really make this Arrangement work for both SAPOL and Skylines Australia.

I look forward to your reply

Janene Fulcher on behalf of Skylines Australia

The Response i received from Neil was that he would be in contact with me shortly, and forward the email on to his supervisors.

Yesterday, i had still not received a reply, and in light of the discussions on the wasteland, i sent the following:

Neil,

I am writing this letter to express my disappointment in the lack of response from yourself or any other officer in regard to our discussion about building a relationship between members of Skylines Australia and SA Police.

You seemed genuinely interested in working with the Skylines Australia community to build a better relationship and rid the state of some of the misconceptions about the owners of imported cars, yet at this stage with no response at all, I feel that you did not take our conversations seriously, especially with the amount of defects that are being mentioned as being carried out personally by yourself on members of Skylines Australia.

To me it feels like your initial response was to try to gain the trust of our members only to lure them out in thinking they were safer, in turn just to defect them and make a point.

If anything it seems like we have been receiving more harrassment from SA Police since our initial discussions, which you can imagine has left a foul taste in our mouths.

We thought we had finally found a reasonable officer who was prepared to listen to, and discuss our concerns with mediation involved, to make the feeling between Skyline Australia members and SA Police a working partnership.

At this stage we still await a response from yourself or someone in a position to make decisions about how we can make relations between Skylines Australia and SA Police better.

I Eagerly await a reply.

Janene Fulcher

On behalf of Skylines Australia.

I came home today to this email:

Janene,

I am sorry you feel this way.

At the moment I have spoken to management and I recently have been told to contact you and arrange a meeting. I understand your frustration at the time it has taken but please understand that December is Traffic Enforcement Sections busiest time of year. It was my intention to finally get arrangements made to have a meeting around the beginning of February but I have been unable to confirm available dates before contacting you. I intend to do this over the next few days once I speak to my supervisors.

I know that those who bad mouth me are not the majority of SAU and believe me when I say that I do not pick on members of your club specifically. In my line of work people criticising or verbally abusing me is part of the job. I do not take it personally. I inspect several vehicles a day and those who do not meet ADR's receive a defect.

If you can confirm a telephone number to me I will call you over the next two days to finalise details.

I look forward to speaking to you soon.

Neil.

So, we will be having a meeting with this officer in early Feb.

I need your thoughts / opinions as this involves each and everyone of us!

KEEP IT CLEAN! or Heslo will woop your bottoms!

Nene

Edited January 13, 2009 by Nene260RS

[heslo]

Great to hear he's finally taken the time to reply. Here is your chance SAU, a face to face meeting with SAPOL to voice concerns, raise questions and hopefully change opinions (for both SAU and SAPOL) I personally think it would be silly to dismiss this opportunity. Atleast if anything we can say we tried and I myself am quite intrigued as to what SAPOL have to say to us.

Any bullshit in this thread will be deleted. I have no time for moaning or bickering, especially when we want to look like MATURE enthusiasts.

Any valid opinions or question, please feel free to post

[Dohmar]

Great to hear he's finally taken the time to reply. Here is your chance SAU, a face to face meeting with SAPOL to voice concerns, raise questions and hopefully change opinions (for both SAU and SAPOL) I personally think it would be silly to dismiss this opportunity. Atleast if anything we can say we tried and I myself am quite intrigued as to what SAPOL have to say to us.

Any bullshit in this thread will be deleted. I have no time for moaning or bickering, especially when we want to look like MATURE enthusiasts.

Any valid opinions or question, please feel free to post

This is cool to have a response. Tho I know that some cars have been defected for ADR approved items (such as braided brake lines) which begs the question whether there are more laws onto of the ADR's (which as I understand it, are separate to state roadworthiness guidelines - federal roadworthiness guide is rather thin compared to the state one)...

I'd like to know if the police are aware of any plans to nationalise the roadworthiness scheme rather than having a huge disparity between the states. I here rumors here and there but nothing concrete.

I'd also like to know what the police's input into motor racing venues are, given the debate in the other thread about WA's motorplex

Would be curious to see if Neil has any statistics about makes and models of cars defected, to see if theres patterns or not, as I wonder if the old shitboxes attract as much attention as imports.

-D

[Nene260RS]

Thats the kind of input i need Ben... keep that kind of stuff coming in guys!

[ted180]

seems to me your asking permission to run cruises, with illegal cars, and not get any defects?

its the law, seriously, fighting it will do nothing. if you drive illegal cars be prepared to pay the price.

surely im not the only one that thinks this?

Edited January 13, 2009 by ted180

[Ryanrb25]

I agree whole heartedly that niel has a job to do regardless of any compromising or agreements. He can not bend the rules and regulations just so we can drive around and in theory risking ourselves and other drivers on the road with our illegally modified vehicles. Regulations are there for everyone's safetly and must be adheared to (stuck on repeat i know). People must realise that he has to answer to a superior officier who probably doesn't give two hoots about what you want so dont be dissapointed if nothing comes of this. But i give you credit for trying. All the best.

[rad100]

would be good to get feedback on defecting standards?

as do they need to have a reason, i.e must check ride height and make point of it.

what we can do if we feel hard done by.

[4PLAYN]

My old skyline got defected when i had 3 rather large friends in the back .... when he brang his tape mesure out i got them out of the car and he mesured .... was 20mm above the lowest height but he still got me as he asked if they can all get in the car again ....

in theory i got defected for nothing and i spent hundreds of dollars to fix something that was legal .... these people are over 100kg each .... i sucked it up and did my thing .... got out of regency and a few months later got defected again for the same thing .... i thought it was bullshit as i still had STOCK sus in the car rather than the lowered and heavier duty springs ....

would be interesting to see if my 2 trips to regency were pointless .....

[heslo]

Tim and Ryan, definatly agree with what you are both saying, drive an illegally modified car, face the consequences. But as I stated above when this situation first arose, many people on this forum wanted the chance to talk to SAPOL about a wide variety of things, not to be exempt from the road rules but to get some answer to their questions and have their voice and opinions heard. The chance is now here and seems like no one wants their say or their voice heard which is fine by me also but confusing at the same time

[Damo_R34]

so who is on the panel for the meeting with SAPOL?

[PREISS]

I would really like SAPOL to know there are actually some people driving around in stock skylines etc,

Why not pick on skyline drivers who do harm, hoon, act stupid. not innocent people.

Being pulled over all the time in a stock car can be very annoying.

On the way to work, fishing , shopping . anything really.

My car is back to completely stock and I still get followed etc.

I may put it back and receive no difference.

[Nene260RS]

Good input Craig....

Damo... that is up for discussion... who should be at this meeting guys???

[DamageInc]

personally im not expecting something decent to come out of it but im not going to bad mouth anyone or person till i see what they have to say on the topic

ie meeting with neil .

it could turn out good , or it could turn bad , either way im here to listen and see what happens.

[MissR34]

can we please all stay positive?

[Dohmar]

Thats the kind of input i need Ben... keep that kind of stuff coming in guys!

I'd also ask about the legislation regarding modifications which actually make the car safer... why it is we get defected for 'non standard air boxes', 'blow off valves' etc, stuff which is blatantly OK...

Coilovers are a good case in point. I spoke to a bloke at pedders last week and he was saying that pedders have been arguing with regency for the last 18 months about coilover laws. There actually is no written legislation about coilovers being illegal, even adjustible ones. When pressed, a regency employee admitted that it was an 'unwritten regency rule'... so I dare ask, how can we get our mods approved without fear of defecting? An engineers certificate would be great but so too would be some kind of report from regency you can keep in the car, perhaps with photos, that show which modifications are allowed to be kept on. It'd save the unnecessary defects.

I'd also be asking them advice about PR and also what their position is on several things (which I won't go into here) pertaining to public perception and media. Not sure how relevant that would be to SAU but its more a point of personal curiosity.

-D

[Stagstock]

My only concern is not that we would be defected for something illegal, but more that we are liable to harassment and defects purely because we are travelling in a group or for the type of vehicles we drive. From what I understand the SAU group all opened bonnets before the start of the cruise which could only be seen as a show of force as much as keeping the roads safe. I would assume that the officers superior would be applying pressure on all of them to MAKE us understand they are incharge.

I agree with nene in saying that a police presence is not nessesarily a bad thing as it keeps the hoons inline and an enjoyable cruise for all. Yet I'm concerned it would be seen as a quick and easy way to remove a large number of cars from the road, and yes a large amount of revenue from the defect payments. Especially when they now don't even have to know a car has a defect to send it straight to regency, I have seen these listed as 'Suspected Defects' with no details of anything wrong with the car and yet still the 'Major' tick box checked.

If they were only concerened with keeping us in check then a presence would be all that is needed, but if they are intent on squashing the cruises they will conduct the above mentioned blitzes. As far as defecting vehicles that are not defectable they are quite within their rights to do so unfortunatelly.

I would want to hear from SAPOL what their intentions are rather than the company line.

Will we be made an example of?

What come back will we have on legal defected vehicles?

Are they actually will to work "with" the SAU community?

They don't pull every single vehicle on the road over, why inspect every vehicle at a meet point? (Yes, I know, debatable)

What happens when a bonnet lift is refused, especially for a parked car? (I'm sure that won't happen)

But now I'm spit balling so I guess it comes down to are we going to be treated fairly or made into the example for other clubs wishing to be a respected 'on road' car club.

Personally nene I think your well on the right track and hopefully your good intentions will come to some good.

Just my thoughts anyway.

[Dohmar]

Good input Craig....

Damo... that is up for discussion... who should be at this meeting guys???

+1 SLED and Nightcrawler

-D

[heslo]

If this were to go ahead Bed, I'd like to put you forward as a person to tag along to the meeting

[rhys5169]

i wish the partakers all the best in the meeting and wish something positive would come out of it but this issue is well above niels head, even above his superiors. the effort would be best put to use speaking to a local MP and getting them on your side and taking it to mal hyde/other senators/mike rann

[Damo_R34]

wouldn't mind asking if there is any discussion of mod plates in south australia? I have no doubt that it works in Queensland?