Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

bugger...your screwed then. If they have already nominated you.

I can still sign it over to someone else, i have had to go to the cop shop before and do a stat dec because they signed it over to the wrong person, i noticed on this one that it has all the stuff on the back to sign it over to someone else.

Usually if it's under a company name dont you just get with a massive fine? I think it was like 5x the norm? I'm not to sure but I know thats how my uncle gets out of them by putting all his cars under the companies name and just get ridiculous tickets, keep in mind this is in brissy

And this is not my company, the boss would not allow that, i would be happy with that if i could though.

Your boss sounds like a d*ck sorry if he's a good man be seriously, he doesn't lose out if you just pay the fine and he says he cant find the person driving the car during the time of the infringement

Company registered vehicles in Victoria have an infringement notice sent out to the company detailing the offence and requesting a nominated driver...if this notice is ignored then they send out a fine to the company with no points but much more dollars. On a typical 3 pointer speeding fine it is about $700 charged to the company. This said, if your company already nominated you then it could be too late for this without cooperation of your company. They would need to say that there was an error on their behalf in nominating you as the driver, and that given the fine happened so long ago they no longer have a log of who was driving. You've told us your company isn't the most cooperative bunch, so onto some suggestions:

Here's the important part...confirm for us that the notice has a visible mark next to "vehicle other than heavy vehicle". If this is the case, then the nominated driver may not need a truck licence to accept the points as civic compliance have identified the vehicle as light duty and therefore drivable with a car licence.

My other suggestion relates to contesting the fine itself. Given that the vehicle was a truck, you might be able to challenge the fine based on vehicle properties. I'm talking about inefficiencies in braking. It is possible you were carrying a very heavy load or that you hadn't driven this particular truck/payload for long before the incident and when you applied the brakes for the red light you knew almost straight away that you would not stop in the distance required. Instead, you maintained a safe legal speed and continued on through the intersection. This in itself is a long shot and will probably only result in a more leniant fine, but if you are going to contest it in anyway I would be focusing on this. At the least it is an argument for one's ignorance, versus one's negligence. A leniant magistrate might give you a fine with no points to preserve your licence, particularly if you plead your case that your job/family depends on it. Your driving history certainly doesn't help things.

I wish you the best of luck, but I have to say: I don't think this is the smartest place to be asking for ways to get out of an infringement. Now that you've had some input from members I'd be asking mods to delete the thread for you. Just like v8tzr should really save his triumph over the law story for the pub, because admitting that you lied to civic compliance isn't characteristic of being "older, smarter" :cool:

P.S. for interest's sake, saying you went through on a greenlight or even amber is not a valid defence. Unless the camera or sensor is faulty, the sensor is only active during a red light. There are usually two sensors, one just in front of the lines as you enter the intersection, and one on the other side of the intersection. You get snapped after going over each sensor and this is the reason ashneel received a 2 page letter with photos of his car detailing exactly how the offence was committed. The system is pretty bulletproof pending fault with the electronics. If you only go over the first sensor then you do not get a fine, even if you get snapped by the camera, because this indicates that you stopped just before entering the dangerous part of the intersection. If you go over both and have two photos taken, it shows the intent you had to carry on driving through the intersection and you will be charged. So remember, it pays to slam on the brakes even if you think you'll clear the lines by a couple of metres.

You also might want to request the service laws for the particular camera, I've heard their really slack with the servicing and apparently it states somewhere it must be serviced and tested periodically otherwise your ticket is invalid

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...