Thread: " Who Says Pumas' Can't fly"

Originally Posted by wrinklearthur

Hi All
I would fight this infringement on the grounds, there is more than one vehicle in the photo.
The speed and position of the white van may have given the camera a false reading. Just who was speeding ?

Cheers Arthur

There are sensor pads fitted in each lane to determine which vehicle is exceeding the speed limit, thereby negating that argument. These ones (fixed speed cameras) are not radar or lidar based, its the physical movement of an object over the sensor to prevent confusion and allowing each lane to be monitored.

Bugger.

Matt.

PS - Scott Cameron has been successful against man-operated speed detection devices because he has found errors in operation or breaches of operating guidelines - which is good - just not errors in the accuracy of the device. At the end of the day he's not a Solicitor so can't represent you, just offer advice, and in the case of fixed speed cameras has not been successful despite what he claims. I'm no fan of fixed speed cameras by any means, nor a fan of some bloke making claims and taking money from people about to lose their licence/job etc. But, see what he has to say.....

Originally Posted by mudmouse

Yep, and I'm certain they have designed it that way - you wrap people up in process and paperwork and they'll soon give up that fight and go back to living their life...

Yep. My local council has a free full-sized shuttle bus. It doesn't go anywhere useful so is usually empty.

After a few months the council will be able to report it was under-utilised and therefore they can scrap it.

As Nepean Hospital car parking costs $6 a time and the car parks are always full with queues out onto the surrounding streets, it would be nice to be able to board a free bus from one of the shopping centres and be taken to the hospital. But no, that is to sensible for Penrith Council.