(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

OT Red Light Camera Ticket

S

Steve@Advance

Well-known Member
Anyone gotten one? My wife has managed to get 2, one about 3 months ago, then another last week!

Both were at the same intersection, same corner, making a right on red without coming to a complete stop. She feels terrible, swears she did stop, especially after getting the first one. I tend to believe her, she is a very cautious driver, not one to take chances.

The car is registered in my name only, so the ticket is in my name. I'm undecided what to do.

The first one, I just paid it, didn't question it. This one has me in a quandary, should I pay it, contest it, ignore it?

There is a place to sign and return, ask for a hearing. If I do this, chances are I will never hear from them.... OR if they do set a date, I take off work, show up without a lawyer, I'm automatically guilty, and will be court ordered to pay, probably plus court costs.

Or, I can ignore it. This is not a criminal offence. No warrant, registration, license, etc cannot be withheld. They will turn it over to collection agency, but not against credit rating. There is a one time $25 late fee, which raises it to $100, so they say.

Or I pay it. It says "paying is an admission of guilt" which may or may not go against MY driving record.

Here's my take... Technically, I am NOT GUILTY! I was not driving, the camera only takes a pic of the car and license plate, not the occupants. Can I be held responsible if someone else driving my car commits a violation? Can I be required to testify against my wife?

I'm not completely opposed to red light cameras, I think they have their place, but they can also be used as revenue generators when set and enforced too closely.

Enough of my rant, any thoughts?
 
DO NOT IGNORE IT!!!! 2. MOST MOVING VIOLATIONS GO AGAINST YOUR RECORD and fail to stop can be a major one. Seems like in some areas if you challenge it, it goes away. Hopefully MIKE WA will chime in.
 
(quoted from post at 19:33:09 02/08/15) Anyone gotten one? My wife has managed to get 2, one about 3 months ago, then another last week!

Both were at the same intersection, same corner, making a right on red without coming to a complete stop. She feels terrible, swears she did stop, especially after getting the first one. I tend to believe her, she is a very cautious driver, not one to take chances.

The car is registered in my name only, so the ticket is in my name. I'm undecided what to do.

The first one, I just paid it, didn't question it. This one has me in a quandary, should I pay it, contest it, ignore it?

There is a place to sign and return, ask for a hearing. If I do this, chances are I will never hear from them.... OR if they do set a date, I take off work, show up without a lawyer, I'm automatically guilty, and will be court ordered to pay, probably plus court costs.

Or, I can ignore it. This is not a criminal offence. No warrant, registration, license, etc cannot be withheld. They will turn it over to collection agency, but not against credit rating. There is a one time $25 late fee, which raises it to $100, so they say.

Or I pay it. It says "paying is an admission of guilt" which may or may not go against MY driving record.

Here's my take... Technically, I am NOT GUILTY! I was not driving, the camera only takes a pic of the car and license plate, not the occupants. Can I be held responsible if someone else driving my car commits a violation? Can I be required to testify against my wife?

I'm not completely opposed to red light cameras, I think they have their place, but they can also be used as revenue generators when set and enforced too closely.

Enough of my rant, any thoughts?
Click to expand...
here I live, I can see the stills & video with lights. You will be convinced that camera don't lie. I estimate that 97% of drivers wheels never actually stop turning at stop signs! Enforced to that certainty, the revenue stream would be incredible. If she didn't feel the car & her body jerk backwards at end of the stop, then she didn't actually stop. Go experiment.
 
Steve you do have a dilemma! You might try to video tape the corner to see if it is set to take only pictures of people going through the light no matter whether turning right or not. Their should be a light flash when the camera takes the picture day or night. Believe me if they put a camera in that spot their will be some one running it with in an hour! Use the tape in your defense! Hopefully this will not go to the insurance company and raise your rates! If it will go on your insurance its is worth it to fight it!
Ypop
 
If the vehicle is in your name you are responsible for it! If she drives it most of the time it should be in her name. If she is sure she is innocent then fight it, they must save the video, ask to see it.
 
I would not ignore it. Here in IL not stopping at a red light is a moving vialation. If you get 3 of those in one year your license is suspended. Plus the increases insurance costs. I would plead not guilty and go have my day in court. Don't know what it is like in your state but that's what it is here
 
Allan sez - Send in a picture of the funds. :>)

I heard of someone doing that, and they promptly received a picture of a set of handcuffs from the cops.
 
In Iowa we had them and they were declared unconstitutional. Now they have all been removed. We do have speed cameras on the freeway through Des Moines and they allow you ten over the posted limit.
 
Who stops for rite turn wheater lite is red or green or yellow in Texas! Don't if like not pay that .65 toll with 1.50 handling fee that will end up suppending dl that tx is good about.
 
in my NY county on the ticket is a website that you can view not only the still pics but also the video of your alleged violation. it will show if your guilty or not---i was and paid!
 
We still have them in Cedar Rapids Iowa , no mention of them being unconstitutional, I know they are fighting to get rid of them . The speed cameras are in question by DOT as city didn't put warning signs far enough away . None of the tickets go on driving record. Third party company that installs and runs the cameras. City gets share of the cash. City claimed it was all about safety . But now they are holding meeting to figure out if cameras are outlawed , how will they make up three million dollar loss.
 
There are cases starting to set precedence that traffic cam's are unconstitutional, Ohio being one. I would take it to court and reference those cases. Traffic cams are just a money grab, that is why they are being struck down.
 
As an attorney if I ever got one I would go into Court and demand to see, confront and cross examine my accuser (the camera) and if that's not possible Id challenge it on Constitutional grounds, regardless if the courts in my jurisdiction had already settled it. Likewise, Id demand evidence it was me NOT another person driving and challenge an "automobile" instead of a person being the wrongdoer. HOWEVER if I had to hire an attorney to do any of that it would be cheaper to just pay the ticket lol

Of course, its the laws in your jurisdiction that matter NOT what some person says here and over many years in the legal profession I've found its hard to beat city hall, although since I can afford to hire myself Id still challenge it just for the fun curiosity and satisfaction of it, win or loose.

John T Country Lawyer
 
1) I do not know your wife's driving habits but I would be willing to bet money she did not come to a complete stop.

2) I would not ignore the ticket as they suspend your license around here.

3) They have a picture of the crime. Kinda hard to beat that in court.

4) It's your car. It's your problem. They may put it on your wife's record if you agree to pay it.

5) Two tickets from the same camera in 3 months. Maybe it's time to take a couple extra minuets and wait for the light to turn green before turning.
 
Depends on the laws where you are. Several years ago they had some in downtown Minneapolis, lots of tickets mailed to owners. Someone discovered that under Mn law it has to identify the DRIVER!!!
Oops, suddenly all pending tickets were dismissed, & a whole bunch that had paid the fine got refunds.
If I were you I would fight it after checking local laws to be sure it has to identify the driver. Running a red light is definitely a moving violation & will show up on your record in most states.
Willie
 
(quoted from post at 17:50:05 02/08/15) As an attorney if I ever got one I would go into Court and demand to see, confront and cross examine my accuser (the camera) and if that's not possible Id challenge it on Constitutional grounds, regardless if the courts in my jurisdiction had already settled it. Likewise, Id demand evidence it was me NOT another person driving and challenge an "automobile" instead of a person being the wrongdoer.

John T Country Lawyer
Click to expand...


John I've wondered about that for some time. Would love to sit in a court room and see that argued out!

Rick
 
"Once bit, twice shy" I'd pay it and tell my wife to avoid that intersection unless she comes to a [u:654c4848f0]compete[/u:654c4848f0] stop.
She might well have learned the first time but to keep marital bliss you better not mention it.
 
Depends upon state law.

Traffic cameras are being challenged and will most likely eventually be ruled unconstitutional but such has not yet happened.

Guilty? Pay it.

Certain that not guilty? Roll the dice.

Dean
 
The sharpest crookedest sleaziest lawyer around here once got a speeding ticket, and of course he had to defend himmself. Got into court, and it was just small municipal court and a local police department. He began demanding the calibration records and history of the radar gun, calibration records of the tuning forks used for setting the radar gun, history records of storage and and chain-of-custody paperwork for the tuning forks, the certifiction records of the testing lab, refraction and reflection testing records of the cop car windshield, the certification and etc. records of the arresting officer's training insitute.... etc. etc. etc., of course nobody could come up with the data. Not guilty.
 
We have a local that wants you to stop and count to 3 before you proceed. Gets a lot of money for the city that is right next to I 74. They have been on I 74 because they now own a piece of ground that is on the north side and think that is fine for the big speeders.
 
Fight it....Here in Houston they had to get rid of them...there was a camera at the corner of Scott and the 610 Loop....I always wondered why they would place one there. It is a dangerous intersection with a lot of accidents, hence the decision to place one there.Turns out that the accidents are due to the timing of the traffic lights. If you pass there you will not sense it....however if you sit at the corner for an hour you will see how dangerous it is. The City has not done anything to correct the timing of the traffic lights. It is a money maker for the city.
 
I think the question shoud be, can you prove that you wernt there? Were you at work and have witnesses that can say you never left? If so, I would say go to court. Ignore the fact that you know who did it, its up to the state to prove who did it. Its up to you to prove you didnt. If the cameras are that good, they should be able to ID who was driving and if they can do that, why did they send the ticket to you when they can see a female was driving? Sounds like somebody isnt doing their job, dont it? Make them prove you are guilty.

Just because the car is registered to you dont mean squat. Neighbor borrows your car to go to Home Depot but robs a bank instead? Not your problem and you wont hang for it. Same if somebody uses your car and speeds or runs a red light. Remember, the DRIVER, not the owner is considered in ccontrol of a vehicle. If you are at work, you sure cant be in ccontrol of a vehicle your wife is driving, can you?

I would be proactive on this, in WI running lights is a big deal to insurance companies.
 
If wife is SURE she stopped before turning, I'd request a hearing. A few years back while returning home from a tractor pulling contest, i was pulled over for speeding ($95 fine, 3 points on the point system) by a rent-a-cop. I went to the hearing, in the evening, just me and the magistrate. Before i could plead my case, the magistrate says : Lets make a deal, we'll say 5 mph over, $50, no points. I didn't but should of said: not 5 mph over, your rent-a-cop is not here...
 
My wife got one in Garland Texas. Before I could tell the Lady it was not my wife. She smarted off to me about having pictures of my wife driving.I told her I would like to see the photos of a blind person driving. Never heard another word.
 
First of all, just because they sent you the letter doesn't mean you got it. If they want to make sure you receive the letter, they should send a certified or registered letter. What proof they have you received a letter? I would just wait to receive a registered letter, so they know you got it. Have your wife throw it in the garbage, then you can say you never saw a letter.

Here, the cameras take several pictures. Of your license plate, of the driver and some, the rear license plate. A friend got a speeding ticket one time and showed me the letter. It was plain to see who was driving and a nice picture of the license plate. It was no question who was driving.

Good luck,
Dick
 
In Texas, camera enforcement does not go on your driving record (as you noted), it's written in the statutes that way and probably because the camera is not able to prove who is driving. The State considers it a civil matter rather than a criminal matter. You can look up the laws on the Texas government website.

Were you notified via certified mail where you have to sign something as proof that you got it? If it was important enough to get you into legal hot water wouldn't the city want to make absolutely sure you were notified? Can they prove that the Post Office didn't lose it? It happens.

Where are the Police Unions in all of this? Do they want their jobs farmed out to third party electronics? What's next, a self-driving google cop car?

Basically it's not right for you to get a ticket when you didn't do anything. Fight it and tell them you weren't driving. Then do like OJ and tell them you won't rest until you find the REAL culprit!
 
'Way back before even pocket calculators, I was riding with a buddy in Clinton, NC at 7pm on New Years Eve. We had just left a liquor store and about a block down the street a city cop pulled "Herm" over for speeding. Claimed he was going 74 in a 40 mph zone, and wrote Herm a ticket.

The thing was, the cop knew Herm and assumed he would have already been drinking at that time on New Years Eve and he could get him for DUI. Herm hadn't been and was cold sober. (For once). The speeding ticket was just to justify the traffic stop.

Herm was an engineer, and when he went into court, he took a slide rule and about a ream of scratch paper. He went into acceleration rates, terminal velocities, and a bunch of other engineering terms and factors. He proved to the court that in order for him to have been going 74 where the cop said he was, his big beast of a Cadillac would have had to have been capable of accelerating from 0 to 74 in 3.6 seconds, etc.

The judge finally threw Herm out just to get rid of him.
 
Yep but the constitutional grounds and argument is sort of above a trial court, they would just rule one way or another then it would have to be challenged on constitutional grounds in higher courts. The right to confront and cross examine your accuser (a camera???)is key and many of these cases are already been settled in some courts and I haven't even researched my owns states laws and cases, but Id still just do it win or loose cuz that's how Im wired lol

John T
 
The places that put them in claim that they were done so for safety, but statistics show that rear end collisions at them increase incredibly because people slam on their brakes to avoid getting a ticket and get rear ended by those not familiar with them. I hear that over in Chicago, they have them virtually at every intersection to take the safety fines all the way to the bank, and even though Chicago got caught shaving the time for yellow lights to increase the amount of tickets, they refuse to refund anyone's money. I've seen them while out and about around the country and refuse to make a turn on red even after coming to a complete stop and waiting. People can honk, I'm not turning on red if there is a camera. Forget it, no $$$ from me into anyone's political coffers. When I lived in Illinois, they were going up all over the place, and working on the telephone systems at several police departments, what I saw were people being hired JUST to deal with red light camera tickets alone...new, separate windows just for that. But, a lot of towns also had them removed because the towns people were threatening the lives and jobs of politicians. One place when I lived in Illinois was a town called Shaumburg. They put one up at an exit of a nearby tollway, and people were slamming on their brakes while coming off exit ramps to avoid getting tickets, causing some serious, deadly accidents that got people boycotting a nearby super duper mall, revenue generator for Shaumburg that got to the point where the mall went after the village and forced them to take it/them out...or else politicians careers would be ended. They pulled them out.

I saw cameras at an intersection a few miles from me in rural Indiana where I shop just yesterday, but they weren't marked as red light cameras, which they have to be. Four cameras at an intersection recently annexed by an overreaching town, but they didn't say anything about being red light. I looked. They day they become red light cameras, I'm going to find somewhere else to shop, and encourage as many people as I can get to listen to me to do the same thing until they are taken down.

Mark
 
In my case, I was visiting my son up near Portland OR. He was driving my car and made an illegal right turn on a red light. Flash! They sent me a video of the infraction, and also a very clear picture of the front seat of the car. If I was not the driver, send a photocopy of my drivers license and any information I had on the actual driver. My son had no problem taking the blame. My point is; up in Portland, they cover all the bases.
 
My question is, why are people coming up to a red light at such speed that they cannot safely stop, knowing they are going to have to stop no matter if turning right or going straight ahead. Only reason is, they don't intend to stop. Not arguing about getting a ticket when you are not the driver. The light is always red before it turns green and is totally different than the other practice of trying to get through that green before it turns yellow. It really gets difficult to try to obey speed limits and signal lights when others don't care.
 
Not stopping is a moving deal.

A camera takes a still photo.

What is the picture proving? What is it a picture of?

I've never understood really, and live in MN where they threw the cameras out, fortunately.

Paul
 
There have been lots of shenanigans with the red light cameras. Often they are installed and operated by private companies who split the proceeds with the local municipalities. In some cities, they've found lights set up with very short yellow light times, such that it's impossible for a car traveling at the speed limit to avoid running a red light. Some cities have pulled them out after bad experiences. Others have found that simply re-timing their traffic lights is more effective at reducing accidents than the red light cameras.

If you decide to fight the ticket, do your research first. Chances are you're not the first person to dispute a camera ticket in your state; figure out what your rights are and what burden of proof is on the city. Also, I'd spend a little time at that intersection and check the timing on the lights.

One last thought: It's difficult to prove a negative! Red light cameras capture cars entering an intersection after the light turns red. The picture shows your car turning right on a red, which is LEGAL. Make them prove your wife DIDN'T stop before the light turned. Unless they have high-speed video, they can't prove it. Note that they should have to show video of the approach of your car to the light, since it's quite possible your wife stopped BEFORE the light turned red, then proceeded. That's still legal, even if she was rolling at the moment the light turned.
 
Tell it to the judge....

Doesn't matter if you get 10,000 people on here to absolve you (your wife) of the ticket. Only ONE person matters....That judge.

I fought a speeding ticket in Kentucky a few years ago. It was in a school zone. Double fine/double points. Lights were flashing, just that they weren't VISIBLE. (Blocked by a tree limb) I went in for initial hearing. Plead not guilty. Goes to pre trial hearing. azzhat young prosecutor didn't want to soil his conviction rate. Wouldn't hear my evidence. Goes to jury trial. I have to take lawyer this time. Finally got judge to look at pictures, work order from 6 days later where highway dept trimmed trees away from sign. etc... Judge looks at cop and prosecutor and asks why we're wasting the courts time, my time, and the public's money if we knew the sign was blocked from day one.

Not guilty.

Cost me 3 days of missed work, 3 trips to court house (gas, parking, etc) and $375 in lawyers fees. No fine, no points from license, and no apology from cop and/or prosecutor.

In the end, the ONLY person who could help me was the judge. And she could have just as easily smacked her gavel down and told me to pay the fine.
 
There are a couple of bills pending in the AZ legislature. One is to abolish all red light cameras in the state. The second bill is for a traffic cop to review all pictures taken instead of an employee of the company that owns the cameras and collects a share of the fines.

The standard fine is $250 in AZ, but you can cut that in half by paying $125 to attend an all day driver's school. Failure to respond to a ticket will result in the court issuing a bench warrant for your arrest.

The current law in AZ strongly favors the company that owns the traffic cameras. It has been documented that the cities that have the cameras lose money on the whole operation.

Statistics in many cities indicate that the cameras have reduced the number of red light runners - but has increased the number of accidents of cars running into the back of other cars. Auto insurance companies are not happy with the cameras, so I'm told.
 
In Wisconsin, you have the right to a jury trial. I have tried 2 speeding tickets to jury's and represented myself. My success rate is 50%. At trial, someone must be present to represent the camera. If that person is not a sworn officer of the law, The jury would have to give credence to the wife's testimony. I now have a running dash cam with time and date stamp for evidence, for my protection in cases like this.
 
It seems to me that the burden of proof is on the issuing agency when (or if) it gets to court.

Some observations on my part...
1) Ticket issued to owner because that is the only name/address on file connected to that license plate.
2) I would expect some means to identify the driver should be required - as in photo showing driver. That would immediately prove that you were not the driver.
3) As previously stated, your constitutional right to face your accuser.

Another point of information: if you just ignore it, as in typical government fashion, it will continue to grow until it is resolved. Could end up looking more like the national debt than a traffic fine.

Bottom line? FIGHT IT!!!!! Even if you lose, it will cost them money and time. May also be a step in getting electronic surveillance eliminated.
 
If you broke the rules does it matter what method they used to catch you? Video's are admissible evidence in court.
 
Cleveland Ohio took it to the voters who voted the cameras out. Nuff said
Now for the people not stopping before turning, that is a common occurrence here in NE Ohio. I see people coming from a block away and speed right on through the turn, never checking for unseen cars etc. Yesterday saw a pickup ttruck go thru a red light and the right turner had to climb the berm. Both at fault in my book
 
These have been up in Germany since the late 1960's. They are still up and operating in Des Moines Iowa.
 
In America today it's not about, "if you did it" it's about revenue. It's all about money$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$Damn shame they can get enough bulldozers to push all of D.C. into the Potomac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Christmas light parade
Replies
0
Views
184
John in Mich
J
3
tax time again
Replies
17
Views
2K
37chief
3
C
Red power hay making tractor?
Replies
7
Views
880
jwal10
J
D
Looking for a Backup Camera Recommendation
Replies
18
Views
1K
MikeinKy
M
Brian G. NY
Speaking of Cart Keys
2
Replies
20
Views
643
Brian G. NY
Brian G. NY
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top