I am proud to be on that list.Quote:
Originally Posted by V8Ian
Printable View
I am proud to be on that list.Quote:
Originally Posted by V8Ian
A friend had a Audi Quattro - one of those lame ones with the little normally aspirated 2.4 V6. He received a letter in the mail saying that his vehicle had been spotted doing burnouts by a member of the public and as a result a formal warning had been placed on his driving record and would be taken into account in any future traffic infringements.
Now this guy drives like a pensioner, the car being awd and with its low power cannot even do burnouts and it was in an area of town he does not frequent.
The description was "was a white car with rego number zyz 123. The guy formally responded that it was not his car and the complainant must have written down the rego number incorrectly. No luck the warning would remain.
The guy then requested that the matter be heard by a court where he could make his case. Response - as no formal charges had been laid going to court was not available to him but the warning would remain on his record and be taken into account in any future actions. His only recourse to have the warning removed from his record was to initiate civil action against the police - of course he then decided it just was not worth the effort.
Garry
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon
I'm interested to hear more mate. I wouldn't do too much. Certainly not $2000 worth. Just sit back, relax, rock up to court for the mention and see what they have. Plead not guilty and if it's not you then it will be thin enough the prosecutor will pull it and not proceed.
Someone else posted they had an infringement and the bike in the photo not only had the number plate partially covered, the bike had different exhausts.
I cant say I blame you guys as there was a time I'd have been just as concerned. These days I say bring it on.
Happy Days.
Initially I wrote a letter stating the facts, which was discounted by the expiations branch.Quote:
Originally Posted by joel0407
I then had to appear in court. In preparation for that I expended quite a considerable amount of time taking and printing photos to prove my case, searching, downloading and printing supporting evidence, etc. When I went to court and said I was not guilty the magistrate then gave me a date for a pre trial conference. I wasn't even given the opportunity to state my case, he wasn't interested.
To get to court the first time I had to employ someone to be in my workshop (I am a self employed mechanic) otherwise the doors would have been shut. My time plus my expenses employing someone else would be getting up towards the $2000 mark.
I will have to do the same next week for the pre trial conference (or shut the doors) and possibly again for a trial.
It is beyond my comprehension that the system is such that I have to do all of this at my expense when I didn't commit an offence. Not being able to contact the relevant police prosecutor today is just a bit of icing on the cake.
I have no intention of playing nicely at the pre trial conference or in court if it comes to that. I will also appeal any decision that may go against me if needs be.
I am absolutely appalled that the legal system can be tied up for such a frivolous matter. The ticket should never have been issued. The expiations branch should have quashed it on the basis of my explanatory letter and when it was forwarded to the prosecutions branch it should have been binned.
How are you guilty if they didn't pursue the matter???? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh
You obviously have no idea how the court system works then.....Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon
:angel:
It sounds like that but what average Joe would?Quote:
Originally Posted by Treads
Happy Days.
The barrister I hired recently to keep my backside out of prison, told me he wins cases by the inability of vicpol to correctly do their job, not for any other reason.
When you spend time in court, you'll see the ones with no teeth, domestic violence, drugs etc, it's well worth sitting in on a few:D
Bob , I wouldn't say the cop harassment video was a set up , more like he knew what would happen. If you where pulled over continuously and asked repetitive questions for 20-45 min each time, how many times would it take before you film it? 10, 15 in this blokes case he claims 20, the vid being number 21. For me it would be in the single digits:D.
Here's a question, at what point does those sort of actions become an issue for compensation if you where a business? E.g Harley ride local area tours, owner going from one customer to next loses 10- 20 hrs worth of work or an owner/ trader/consultant going from one job or customer site to the other being pulled over losing 1 hr pay or a customer each time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treads
Correct. At nearly 40 years old this is my first foray into the seedy world of overpaid public servants filling in their day with trifling bull**** and self importance.
By any sane and reasonable measure, when I got a letter requiring court attendance regarding the allegation of a minor traffic offence there is no reason it couldn't have been dealt with on the spot. Having to attend just to plead not guilty is time wasting of the highest order. I had already effectively plead not guilty by refusing to pay and electing to take it to court. I shouldn't have to make umpteen unreturned phonecalls and attend court two or three times.