Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuous li

Motorised & Electric Scooters
MV
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:54 pm

Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuous li

Postby MV » Mon Jan 24, 2011 1:31 pm

Hi all, just popping in for a little bit of help, I have done some searching & I think I've posted in the right section, if not please be kind!

I have two issues (fines!) at the moment: the first is for overtaking on a single continuous dividing line: I was being tailgated by an unmarked police car at the time, except I didn't know it was a police car, hence I was a little nervous & trying to put some space between me & the maniac behind me...

He also booked me for speeding at the same time (100km in an 80 zone), which was a fair cop.

Any thoughts on that one? I think court would be my best option...

The other issue: I was fined for not wearing a helmet when I moved my motorbike from a carpark in the service station to the bowser itself without wearing my helmet: I was under the impression it was private property & I didn't need to.

Any clarification on that one? Any chance of getting off?

The fines themselves are not an issue, there is always a payment plan, but these little indiscretions are eating into my points...

Any advice anyone may have would be most appreciated, if you need any further details, let me know.

Cheers, Mick.

LEO
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:33 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby LEO » Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:13 pm

MV wrote:Any thoughts on that one? I think court would be my best option...


Seeing that you admit to the offences, going to court is only a good option if you can afford it and need the points or the police brief is lacking.


MV wrote:The other issue: I was fined for not wearing a helmet when I moved my motorbike from a carpark in the service station to the bowser itself without wearing my helmet:
Fair enough, going on the road rules

Hardy wrote:A rider includes someone in control of a vehicle. See Road Rule dictionary for "Rider", and also rr.17, and note rr.17(2) exception for bicycles only.
A person steering a vehicle and providing propulsion is in control of it.
Then read road rule 271 and note the exemption there too.


see this post http://trafficlaw.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1558

MV wrote: I was under the impression it was private property & I didn't need to.
Well you have found out you were wrong then haven't you.

MV wrote:Any clarification on that one? Any chance of getting off?
Nope (unless the police stuff up the brief or process)

PDM
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:47 pm

Postby PDM » Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:44 pm

Pay the fines and cop the points.

Speeding up and overtaking on a continuos solid white line is not exactly something you've got any reasonable defence for. You had other options you could have taken in that situation so your decision to break the law will be a hard one to fight and impossible to win.

As for the no helmet, a servo is still considered a public road (ie. a place the public drive on) so you are still at fault with that too.

I'm a rider myself and get where you're coming from, but unfortunately these are an obvious cop it on the chin and know better for next time.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8489
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:18 pm

I was fined for not wearing a helmet when I moved my motorbike from a carpark in the service station to the bowser itself without wearing my helmet


Most car parks are considered roads whether or not it is private land. So not a lot different to a car driver doing the same thing without a seatbelt on, except that the chance of falling off your bike is zero when you're pushing it across a petrol station.

No doubt some of you are surprised to learn that walking your motorbike to a petrol bowser without fastening an australian standard approved helmet is illegal - but not as surprised as I am that there are police out there who could be bothered issuing a 3 point infringement notice for this conduct. No doubt the TAC will one day publish statistics which show dozens of motorcyclists each year suffering head injuries while pushing their bikes without helmets on?

Day
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby Day » Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:24 pm

MV wrote:
I have two issues (fines!) at the moment: the first is for overtaking on a single continuous dividing line: I was being tailgated by an unmarked police car at the time, except I didn't know it was a police car, hence I was a little nervous & trying to put some space between me & the maniac behind me...



Unfortunately this is the price we pay to have a smaller rego plate. Next time you see a motorbike, try and read the plate. See how close you get before you can be one hundred percent certain that you have it. It is pretty close, cetainly closer than you would need to get for a car. Then of course if enough people complain about the polce getting too close, then we could find ourselves wearing the same size plates as cars, with all the new found ADR's governing the fenders associated with such a big thing hanging off our rear end.

Good luck with the rest of it though.

Cheers.

Day
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Postby Day » Mon Jan 24, 2011 9:26 pm

Hardy wrote: No doubt the TAC will one day publish statistics which show dozens of motorcyclists each year suffering head injuries while pushing their bikes without helmets on?


Nope. You won't be able to find such stats as the rider would be too embarassed to admit this. 8)

Comrade Ash
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:10 am

Postby Comrade Ash » Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:10 am

Day wrote:
Hardy wrote: No doubt the TAC will one day publish statistics which show dozens of motorcyclists each year suffering head injuries while pushing their bikes without helmets on?


Nope. You won't be able to find such stats as the rider would be too embarassed to admit this. 8)


Hahaha, reminds me of a time I was filling my car up and a motorbike rider pulls into the bowser across from me, some other bloke is filling up at the other side of it and the motorbike guy falls over and says something about "slippery diesel".

PDM
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:47 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby PDM » Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:11 pm

Day wrote:
MV wrote:
Unfortunately this is the price we pay to have a smaller rego plate. Next time you see a motorbike, try and read the plate. See how close you get before you can be one hundred percent certain that you have it.
Cheers.


So I checked that out today and the best I got was around 30 feet with accurate results. Now given that my eyes are screwed from staring at computer screens over the past 10 years I know someone like my wife could easily make the plate from 50 feet.
Was also curious about the 'smaller' number plate so I compared it with a tape measure to my bike and the slimline plates that are on my car. Hmmm I think you need your eyes checked. No excuses for being able to make a motorcycle's number plate from a reasonable distance.

Day
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby Day » Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:47 pm

PDM wrote:
Day wrote:
MV wrote:
Unfortunately this is the price we pay to have a smaller rego plate. Next time you see a motorbike, try and read the plate. See how close you get before you can be one hundred percent certain that you have it.
Cheers.


So I checked that out today and the best I got was around 30 feet with accurate results. Now given that my eyes are screwed from staring at computer screens over the past 10 years I know someone like my wife could easily make the plate from 50 feet.
Was also curious about the 'smaller' number plate so I compared it with a tape measure to my bike and the slimline plates that are on my car. Hmmm I think you need your eyes checked. No excuses for being able to make a motorcycle's number plate from a reasonable distance.


Funny, I only checked this yesterday, on the move, not sitting still with a measuring tape. And found that we got to within under two seconds distance from the motorbike in front. Given that it is advised to keep a stopping distance of 2 seconds for a car in optimal condtions from the vehicle in front and 3 seconds or over in poor conditions then I still stand by my post. What were the conditions and speed zone for the tests that you conducted?

Also, as a rider, I recall being taught to keep a buffer zone of 3 seconds from the vehicle in front in optimal conditions.

By the way, I wear glasses and have had my eyes tested only recently and found the glasses still give me 20/20 vision. What's your point? Also please define "reasonable distance". ........ on the move.......

Allowing for speed zone and speed. If you can see a motorbikes rego closer than a cars rego (Slimline not included, I'm talking standard) then you have some pretty unbelievable visual acuity. :shock:

Day
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby Day » Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:55 pm

PDM wrote:
Day wrote:
MV wrote:
Unfortunately this is the price we pay to have a smaller rego plate. Next time you see a motorbike, try and read the plate. See how close you get before you can be one hundred percent certain that you have it.
Cheers.


So I checked that out today and the best I got was around 30 feet with accurate results. Now given that my eyes are screwed from staring at computer screens over the past 10 years I know someone like my wife could easily make the plate from 50 feet.
Was also curious about the 'smaller' number plate so I compared it with a tape measure to my bike and the slimline plates that are on my car. Hmmm I think you need your eyes checked. No excuses for being able to make a motorcycle's number plate from a reasonable distance.



Hang on........ I recall some post from you... Are you telling me that all these tests were conducted while the car was standing still? Or that you were the passenger, without the need to focus on all other information at the time? The reason i ask is this:

PDM wrote:If anyone is interested in the outcome to my circumstances, Sean and I attended Court this afternoon and the verdict was;

A conviction recorded, 12 month cancellation of licence and a $700 fine.

:(


Or are you back on the road already and able to conduct the tests where you are the driver and travelling at the speed required for the area and read the plates? Doesn't seem so.
:oops:

PDM
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:47 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby PDM » Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:56 am

Day wrote:
PDM wrote:
Day wrote:
MV wrote:
Unfortunately this is the price we pay to have a smaller rego plate. Next time you see a motorbike, try and read the plate. See how close you get before you can be one hundred percent certain that you have it.
Cheers.


So I checked that out today and the best I got was around 30 feet with accurate results. Now given that my eyes are screwed from staring at computer screens over the past 10 years I know someone like my wife could easily make the plate from 50 feet.
Was also curious about the 'smaller' number plate so I compared it with a tape measure to my bike and the slimline plates that are on my car. Hmmm I think you need your eyes checked. No excuses for being able to make a motorcycle's number plate from a reasonable distance.



Hang on........ I recall some post from you... Are you telling me that all these tests were conducted while the car was standing still? Or that you were the passenger, without the need to focus on all other information at the time? The reason i ask is this:

PDM wrote:If anyone is interested in the outcome to my circumstances, Sean and I attended Court this afternoon and the verdict was;

A conviction recorded, 12 month cancellation of licence and a $700 fine.

:(


Or are you back on the road already and able to conduct the tests where you are the driver and travelling at the speed required for the area and read the plates? Doesn't seem so.
:oops:


Granted your comments about not being in control of a vehicle at the same time, so no I could not perform that test. Yes I am still without my licence, and certainly do not currently drive or ride.

At the time I was the pillion rider on a motorcycle wearing a helmet and tinted visor. Not in full control of a vehicle, but still the need to "focus on all the other information at the same time". - Not :oops: one bit.

My comments still stand that a motorcycle number plate is clearly identifiable from a reasonable distance.

PDM
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:47 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby PDM » Wed Jan 26, 2011 11:29 am

Day wrote:Also, as a rider, I recall being taught to keep a buffer zone of 3 seconds from the vehicle in front in optimal conditions.
Agreed. I was taught 3 to 5 seconds.
Day wrote:
Also please define "reasonable distance". ........ on the move.......
By reasonable distance I mean a safe distance from the vehicle infront just like mentioned above. Not tailgating like the initial post and comments were all about.
Day wrote:
Allowing for speed zone and speed. If you can see a motorbikes rego closer than a cars rego (Slimline not included, I'm talking standard) then you have some pretty unbelievable visual acuity. :shock:

I'm not saying I can see a MC rego closer than a car rego. Slimline plates are still relevant and comparable. My vision is nothing out of the ordinary. Like mentioned earlier I do have issues caused from constant use of computer screens but still have no problems making out a number plate

Day
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:51 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby Day » Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:47 pm

PDM wrote:My comments still stand that a motorcycle number plate is clearly identifiable from a reasonable distance.


Then I am happy to agree that we disagree if you are. All I ask is that you continue to look at motorcycle plates as you travel around and gauge your ability to read them on the move considering such things as alphanumerics on the plate such as C/G I/1 in multiples etc, and see how close you need to get to "accurately" observe the plate in traffic on the move.

Cheers.

PDM
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:47 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby PDM » Thu Jan 27, 2011 9:52 am

Day wrote:
PDM wrote:My comments still stand that a motorcycle number plate is clearly identifiable from a reasonable distance.


Then I am happy to agree that we disagree if you are. All I ask is that you continue to look at motorcycle plates as you travel around and gauge your ability to read them on the move considering such things as alphanumerics on the plate such as C/G I/1 in multiples etc, and see how close you need to get to "accurately" observe the plate in traffic on the move.

Cheers.


Yeah cool. I've actualy found it an interesting exercise to undertake.
I'm learning while doing this that my vision has a distinct threshold and my ability to clearly read the plates can be a difference of as little as 1 extra meter from being 100% accurate to being just a bunch of shapes that I'm guessing some of the alphanumerics like you mentioned.

MV
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby MV » Thu Jan 27, 2011 10:38 am

LEO wrote:Seeing that you admit to the offences, going to court is only a good option if you can afford it and need the points or the police brief is lacking.


I admit nothing, I said I was fined for these offences.

My thoughts were that at the time, I was more worried about not being run over by the twit behind me.

It is not how I would usually ride & the dangerous actions of the car behind me had a direct impact on my actions.

Hardy wrote:A rider includes someone in control of a vehicle. See Road Rule dictionary for "Rider", and also rr.17, and note rr.17(2) exception for bicycles only.
A person steering a vehicle and providing propulsion is in control of it.
Then read road rule 271 and note the exemption there too.


I read that, very interesting. To clarify though, I allegedly rode my motorcycle. I guess not knowing something you allegedly did to be illegal is no defense?

LEO wrote:Nope (unless the police stuff up the brief or process)


Care to extrapolate on that one for me?

Judging by your username, you yourself are a police officer?

Edit: & to come at this from a different angle, if I were to pay the fine for speeding (whether guilty or innocent), would that bode well for taking the overtaking case to court?

More info on the tailgating: There was 5 mins between each alleged offence according to the TIN, the police officer was tailgating me trying to get my attention & pull me over, my thoughts are, once he had my plate it would have been safer for both of us to send me a fine in the mail.

Thanks for you time, guys.

LEO
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:33 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby LEO » Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:18 pm

MV wrote:I admit nothing, I said I was fined for these offences.
Yes, but you also didn't denied it. If you didn't commit the offences, then you may feel like taking it to court as a matter of principle. But should you take it to court relies more on the points I already mentioned.

MV wrote:My thoughts were that at the time, I was more worried about not being run over by the twit behind me.

It is not how I would usually ride & the dangerous actions of the car behind me had a direct impact on my actions.
it would be interesting to see if what the ICV shows.


MV wrote: To clarify though, I allegedly rode my motorcycle. I guess not knowing something you allegedly did to be illegal is no defense?
you are right, Ignorantia juris non excusat ("ignorance of the law does not excuse")


MV wrote:Care to extrapolate on that one for me?


Your chances of winning at court will greatly depend on the police brief and what evidence it contains and if they have followed proper process. Until you get the brief, no one can really tell what your chances are of winning, but if the brief is put together well, your chances would not be very good as going on what you have said and the law, you did commit the offence by not wearing a helmet.

I think you will find hardy's defence is based more on the brief and process then challenging the actual offence, but I will leave it up to him to give his opinion on this as he defends people for a living


MV wrote:Edit: & to come at this from a different angle, if I were to pay the fine for speeding (whether guilty or innocent), would that bode well for taking the overtaking case to court?
Wouldn't make any real difference. Why would you only want to take the overtake to court? what's your defence?

MV wrote:More info on the tailgating: There was 5 mins between each alleged offence according to the TIN, the police officer was tailgating me trying to get my attention & pull me over,
What do you mean “was trying to get your attention”, did he have his lights and/or siren on? if he did, I can see why he was tailgating you. :roll:

MV wrote:my thoughts are, once he had my plate it would have been safer for both of us to send me a fine in the mail.


And who would he send the fine too?

All the officer would possibly know is who the registered owner of the number plate was, if he could see it. (refer to the above dicussion by Day & PDM :lol: )

Owner onus doesn't apply here.

MV
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby MV » Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:40 pm

LEO wrote: it would be interesting to see if what the ICV shows.
My thoughts also, would that be part of the brief?

If it does show him doing his best to run me down, would that help me, or would he be "just doing his job"?

LEO wrote:Wouldn't make any real difference. Why would you only want to take the overtake to court? what's your defence?


The speeding thing, sure, I probably was, I had just overtaken some cars in a safe reasonable manner in a safe spot, couldn't be 100% sure that I wasn't speeding.

The move of overtaking the car that got me the fine was only done to put some space between me & the car behind me, had the car not been on my tail, I would not have overtaken where I did.
LEO wrote:What do you mean “was trying to get your attention”, did he have his lights and/or siren on? if he did, I can see why he was tailgating you. :roll:
Hard to say, I had music playing & was trying to find a safe place to pull over & get out of the way, once I did, there were lights on, yes. This is when I realised it was an unmarked police car.

LEO wrote:And who would he send the fine too?

All the officer would possibly know is who the registered owner of the number plate was, if he could see it. (refer to the above dicussion by Day & PDM :lol: )

Owner onus doesn't apply here.


(I will re read the above)

I would assume the registered owner (me), like a traffic camera offense. Why does owner onus not apply in this case?

There was no way he could NOT have seen my plate & surely the ICV would also have the plate on it?

MV
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:54 pm

Postby MV » Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:51 pm

PDM wrote:Pay the fines and cop the points.

Speeding up and overtaking on a continuos solid white line is not exactly something you've got any reasonable defence for. You had other options you could have taken in that situation so your decision to break the law will be a hard one to fight and impossible to win.


But I don't want to! Just kidding. I do feel a bit hard done by, but that may or may not be justified...

Until recently, in Vic at least it was legal to overtake on a single white line & I did not speed during THAT overtake, otherwise I would have another TIN to show for it.

As above, at the first safe turnout I did just that & found out it was an unmarked car, so I don't think I had any other options...

PDM wrote:As for the no helmet, a servo is still considered a public road (ie. a place the public drive on) so you are still at fault with that too.


Yes, I know that now & it won't be happening again.

LEO
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:33 pm

Re: Fined for no helmet & overtaking on single continuou

Postby LEO » Thu Jan 27, 2011 4:24 pm

MV wrote: My thoughts also, would that be part of the brief?
Should be if it was fitted to the car, if not you ask can ask for it.

MV wrote:If it does show him doing his best to run me down, would that help me, or would he be "just doing his job"?
its all a matter of context, interpretation and explanation by the officer. But most likely "just doing his job"

Even if it was over the top, it still would have little bearing on your offence. Without known the circumstances involved, there was most likely other action you could have taken, instead of the overtake.




MV wrote:
The move of overtaking the car that got me the fine was only done to put some space between me & the car behind me, had the car not been on my tail, I would not have overtaken where I did.

If the officer was following for the five minutes, then he was most likely thinking you were doing a runner, so trying to stay close so he didn't lose you.
If he got you speeding before the first lot of cars, then you overtook them, he would also have to get past them, then he sat on your tail trying to get you to pull over, then you overtook another car illegally and again he had to past them to get behind you again. it doesn't make his actions look out of place.
(again I wasn't there so only looking at the info given)


MV wrote:Owner onus doesn't apply here.


Nope, only really applies to speeding/red lights detected by cameras and parking offences.


MV wrote:I would assume the registered owner (me), like a traffic camera offense. Why does owner onus not apply in this case?


Basically the section 60 & 86 of the Road safety act list "operator onus offence" (correct wording)

Section 84BC explains how an offence is an operator onus offence.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8489
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Postby Hardy » Thu Jan 27, 2011 7:39 pm

Operator onus applies to parking, speed cameras, drive unregistered, tollways, littering and red light cameras only. For all other offences they need to know who was driving.

There are only two issues in your case. First is whether or not the police will adduce in court sufficient evidence that your vehicle exceeded the speed limit and crossed the solid line. If so, then the buck passes to you and you get the chance to allege that you had a lawful excuse - and the only lawful excuse that has any hope is that someone's life was in jeopardy and you had to exceed the speed limit and cross the line in order to avoid a likely fatality.

Whether the police acted reasonably or not or acted illegally or not is usually irrelevant to the question of whether or not they have sufficient evidence that you committed an offence.

ICV is almost never included as part of the prelim or full brief and usually it is raised afterwards as you get closer to hearing. My advice to anyone charged with pretty much any offence is to put aside all the things that you can think of that might help you in your defence and simply ask yourself whether or not paying the fine is going to cause you problems, in which case you then ask yourself whether paying for good legal advice and potentially a court case is preferable to suffering those problems. If so, then you take it to court and let your lawyer sort out the rest.
Last edited by Hardy on Thu Jan 27, 2011 8:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “Motorbikes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest