Safety Cameras Doubling As Speed Cameras

[sh@un]

I have seen the camera on Pennant Hills/Beecroft Rd flash randomly a couple of times now

there's also this setup at G'Western Hwy and Reservoir Rd Eastern Creek, and the intersection of City West Link and Henley Marine Dr

lots more to come no doubt

[KEVGTR]

sounds like you will get a warning letter

Warning letter? how do you know? well i hope so lol

[{Oo{34}oO}]

I have seen the camera on Pennant Hills/Beecroft Rd flash randomly a couple of times now, I guessed that it might do speed now.

I'm pretty sure this system is already in place in the ACT

yeh i got flashed by that one when i was going north bound n 60 so i doubt its operational, prolly just 2 scare pple into slowing down

lol i guess every1 should slow down 4 all those "safety" cameras on the F3 as well lol

[Kujotk]

you clearly havent read the law

they dont need any signs

the red light + speed cameras only have one sign " safety camera ahead"

No i haven't read them lately but when i last got done (nearly 3 years ago) back then all FIXED speed cameras in NSW had to have 3 warning signs before hand. Victoria and SA didn't need to have any warnings, but NSW did.

Redlight cameras have never needed a sign.

Ive always assumed they still need the warning signs because new dedicated fixed speed cameras are still being installed with 3 warning signs, I can't see why they would change the practice now, especially when they still catch people speeding even with the warning signs...

But who cares, if your running a red your an idiot anyway, the speed thing is gay but i can understand the reason for it. Victoria has had the redlight/speed camera for many years already

[Kujotk]

you clearly havent read the law

they dont need any signs

the red light + speed cameras only have one sign " safety camera ahead"

laws do nut days they haves to has a sign at allz

This will be interesting to everyone.

the road rules do not require a sign to be placed warning motorists of fixed speed cameras or safty cameras. But the RTA (who governs these cameras) has set in their own code of conduct (which is basically their own law guiding the way they govern their organisation and can be enforced in the courts) states that although the Australian road rules do not require a sign, the NSW RTA Will supply one sign warning motorists of a fixed Safety camera that reads "Safety Camera Ahead" and all traditional fixed speed cameras in the RTA governing district will have 3 warning signs before aproaching a fixed speed camera, all 3 will state the speed limmit.

So basically you are correct in saying the Law doesnt say anything about speed cameras needing signs, but if you look closer the local RTA rules within NSW will overide it (unless a court says otherwise)

So yes there has to be a sign in NSW or you can get out of it even though the road rules doesn't say so.

"Will signage be installed warning motorists of the approaching cameras?

Yes there will be a sign warning motorists on the approach to safety cameras. The sign will have the text “SAFETY CAMERA AHEAD”, explaining that the main function of the new cameras is to improve the safety of the intersection – by reducing crashes caused by speeding and drivers running red-lights."

Basically once the signs are up, you can get finned and have no contest about appealing the fine aslong as the infringement happens in NSW, no other state that i'm aware of is obliged to put up a sign

[mattymagoo22]

This will DEFINITELY save lives.........

[fatz]

No i haven't read them lately but when i last got done (nearly 3 years ago) back then all FIXED speed cameras in NSW had to have 3 warning signs before hand. Victoria and SA didn't need to have any warnings, but NSW did.

Redlight cameras have never needed a sign.

Ive always assumed they still need the warning signs because new dedicated fixed speed cameras are still being installed with 3 warning signs, I can't see why they would change the practice now, especially when they still catch people speeding even with the warning signs...

But who cares, if your running a red your an idiot anyway, the speed thing is gay but i can understand the reason for it. Victoria has had the redlight/speed camera for many years already

there is no requirement for the signs

and yes you have to be an idiot to miss them and still get booked

.....

[MaTBoY]

I saw the camera at Blacktown on the Highway and Reservoir rd operate the other morning, had a yellowish double flash. i saw them installing that camera a month or 2 back as well. so that camera, at least, has been confirmed.

[Kujotk]

there is no requirement for the signs

and yes you have to be an idiot to miss them and still get booked

.....

i guess some people only read every 2nd post.... there is a requirement for the sign in nsw by RTA guidlines, even though its not required by law

[fatz]

a guideline is not the law

i would call that a courtesy

[Kujotk]

its not a guide line, thats a bad choice of words from my behalf, its a code of conduct by the RTA, and any "reasonable person" would assume that if that is in the NSW RTA code of conduct, then they would put a sign at every speed camera, even though the law says it doesn't have to.

If the court agrees (and in NSW they have in the past) that any reasonable person would think the same way, then your off the hook, only if there is no sign there.

I know where your comming from, the law is the law, but some of the time there are ways around the law and thats why lawyers can charge like wounded bulls, also thats why now the RTA is so pedantic about fixed speed camera signage.

The only reason i originally brought this up was because it sounded like some people had either missed seeing the sign of the new "safety camera" or they weren't present at the time.

There is another angle for fighting an absent sign is trying to proove you were misslead by the RTA, if they are the Road and Traffic Authority (meaning the roads and substituaries are under their controll), basically what they say can be seen as law and if they put in their website (which they have) that they will put a sign for every new so called "safety camera" and then they don't, and you recieve a fine for speeding or going through a red light, you can argue that point aswell and as you can see that they should not have given the fine after misleading the general public. (this hasn't been argued yet because its only new in NSW, but if they forget a sign and a cluey motorist gets done for it, we will see what happens)

Basically the law can say what it likes, but their are other factors and arguments that can make the law invalid depending on the situation.

Other than that only way out of the fine is to say someone else was driving and give them the fine (they cannot say who was driving, even if they look at the camera image and see your face), prove that the camera is inacurate, hope that its out of its recommended calibration period, or prove that its not your car (ie stolen/coppied plates, if its happened in a different city and you can prove that the car was in a different city at the same time,

but at the end of the day its cheaper to cop the fine and only worth fighting if your sure you will win or your about to loose your lisence.

[Kujotk]

Lets not forget that the speed cameras and the saftey cameras are not the same thing, and thus they will not be governed by the same laws....

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speed...amera_faqs.html

Will signage be installed warning motorists of the approaching cameras?

Yes there will be a sign warning motorists on the approach to safety cameras. The sign will have the text “SAFETY CAMERA AHEAD”, explaining that the main function of the new cameras is to improve the safety of the intersection – by reducing crashes caused by speeding and drivers running red-lights.

This is basically a contract between the RTA and any driver who is driving on NSW roads, Because the RTA website says "YES there will be a sign warning....." that is all you need, even if the law doesn't require a sign because the Roads and Traffic Authority said there WILL be a sign.

[fatz]

an ill informed public is just ill informed

ways to get out of speeding and running red light is a different matter.

[4teecal]

So basically you are correct in saying the Law doesnt say anything about speed cameras needing signs, but if you look closer the local RTA rules within NSW will overide it (unless a court says otherwise)

So yes there has to be a sign in NSW or you can get out of it even though the road rules doesn't say so.

Guidelines do not override laws in NSW.

a guideline is not the law

i would call that a courtesy

Exactly.

its not a guide line, thats a bad choice of words from my behalf, its a code of conduct by the RTA, and any "reasonable person" would assume that if that is in the NSW RTA code of conduct, then they would put a sign at every speed camera, even though the law says it doesn't have to.

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.

Lets not forget that the speed cameras and the saftey cameras are not the same thing, and thus they will not be governed by the same laws....

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.

Edited December 24, 2009 by 4teecal

[G7]

Has anyone recieved and infringment notice yet?

I curiuos to see what the turn around time is.

Whether Im in the poo or not!

[Kujotk]

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.

yeah i'll admit those are very slim wins at best but still possible, but the quote on the RTA website is undisputed and will = a win a day in the courts. That is definately misleading. That is a spot where the RTA is responding to a question, if the sign isn't there for safty cameras then you wont get finned. And the guidelines will overide the law if in this instance someone asks the RTA a question (which they have on the link i posted) and then they respond the way they have saying.

I don't get why you think it won't be accepted by the courts. The law says one thing, but the NSW RTA says a complete different thing that ALL saftey cameras WILL have a sign.

Have a look at the link and you will see where the discrepency is, it is not a guide line, guidelines NEVER have the direct words YES or WILL. It is a direct responce and should be treated as such. If the RTA said "The RTA may provide signs but is not bound to do so by law" then there is no argument, but the fact is they didn't and if you read the RTA's pages about safety cameras you are told there WILL be signage, they never state they do not have to do it.

Also I haven't read the road rules (2008) nor am I going to because this is just an online discussion and its Christmas, but Safety Cameras and Fixed Speed cameras are not the same thing, they only share the same fine system. You cannot use the fixed speed camera wording to explain the rules for the safety camera, they are different enough to call for different signage so they are not the same.

Oh and in your reply the term you are looking for is "precident law", no this isn't a precident case, but yes all precident cases first started off as virgin cases at some point in time.

Anyway RTA WILL have signs for these things anyway, I really doubt they will put a camera up without signs and if they do and they don't clarify the discrepency the drivers who get done without signs ill have a fighting chance.

And these things are going to rake in so much $$$ compared to the fixed speed cameras it isn't funny. The becroft/pennant hils road intersection flashed 7 times in about 2 minutes of sitting there waiting for the lights to change. I havent seen so much flash even when Paris Hilton was last in syd.

Merry Christmass SAUers

[SHANE666]

thats gay.

[4teecal]

yeah i'll admit those are very slim wins at best but still possible, but the quote on the RTA website is undisputed and will = a win a day in the courts. That is definately misleading. That is a spot where the RTA is responding to a question, if the sign isn't there for safty cameras then you wont get finned. And the guidelines will overide the law if in this instance someone asks the RTA a question (which they have on the link i posted) and then they respond the way they have saying.

I don't get why you think it won't be accepted by the courts. The law says one thing, but the NSW RTA says a complete different thing that ALL saftey cameras WILL have a sign.

If you want to dispute false advertising take it to a small claims tribunal or the ACC, not a local court.

Have a look at the link and you will see where the discrepency is, it is not a guide line, guidelines NEVER have the direct words YES or WILL. It is a direct responce and should be treated as such. If the RTA said "The RTA may provide signs but is not bound to do so by law" then there is no argument, but the fact is they didn't and if you read the RTA's pages about safety cameras you are told there WILL be signage, they never state they do not have to do it.

It is not written in legislation so it is not a law or regulation. It is a guideline or advice

Also I haven't read the road rules (2008) nor am I going to because this is just an online discussion and its Christmas, but Safety Cameras and Fixed Speed cameras are not the same thing, they only share the same fine system. You cannot use the fixed speed camera wording to explain the rules for the safety camera, they are different enough to call for different signage so they are not the same.

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.

Oh and in your reply the term you are looking for is "precident law", no this isn't a precident case, but yes all precident cases first started off as virgin cases at some point in time.

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.

Anyway RTA WILL have signs for these things anyway, I really doubt they will put a camera up without signs and if they do and they don't clarify the discrepency the drivers who get done without signs ill have a fighting chance.

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.

[fatz]

yea what he said!

did i mention i win!

show me the money!

[MBS206]

yea what he said!

did i mention i win!

show me the money!