How do you know if you have been "served"?

[twysmilng]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Arizona

Our 20-yr-old daughter has received (in the mail) THREE separate photo radar speeding tickets in the last 4 months. They are all in the same area which she drives regularly, and are all 78 mph in a 65 zone (freeway).

She lives at the same address as us (altho she is rarely home).

She has ignored the mailed tickets, which seems to be the popular advice.

However, tonite, a process server rang the doorbell. When I answered the door, he asked for her, I said she wasn't here, and he said does she live here with you? I THINK I again said she's not here. But I am not sure what I said (or if it matters what I said). He wanted to leave papers. I said I didn't want them, and he said he was leaving them on the doorstep, which he did, then he left.

So my question is: Has she been officially served? Does she need to now pay the ticket? What is the least expensive thing she can do at this point?

For what it's worth, she has now started using the cruise control religiously.

Thanks in advance for any information on the "has she been served" issue.

[The Occultist]

In Arizona, you must accept these papers once you've confirmed that the server has the correct address. She has been served.

[tranquility]

Yes, service has been made.

[Jim_bo]

Dude... don't fight the service thing. You are only putting off the inevitable. Also, I have been served at my house before and I can tell you what actually transpired at my front door isn't anything like what was in the report that the seving agent put in his report. I'm sure the server will attest that you verified that she lives with you. Once that happens, he can drop it on your doorstep and she has been served.

[twysmilng]

Thank you for your help! The papers served were exactly the same as what she got in the mail, so she is calling today to pay via credit card.

Does this go against her car insurance? Sorry for being clueless, we haven't lived in AZ very long.

Thank you again

[Maestro64]

i would advise her to get a radar detector, and one that has a GPS that warns of fix location speed enforcement since it will warn her that a speed camera is ahead.

Gee getting 3 ticket in the row from the same speed camera is pretty bad...

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by Maestro64

i would advise her to get a radar detector, and one that has a GPS that warns of fix location speed enforcement since it will warn her that a speed camera is ahead.

Gee getting 3 ticket in the row from the same speed camera is pretty bad...

perhaps cruise control might be a better idea. I would prefer that she stay UNDER the posted speed limit... not under the radar.

[twysmilng]

Update: She called the number on the ticket to pay via credit card. The person who answered the phone told her to write a letter to the judge, asking for the citation to be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

I don't understand why someone at the courthouse would tell her that? Should she write the letter? The media in AZ is always slamming the photo radar tickets.

Anyone??

[fairisfair]

I find that incredibly hard to believe. court personnel NEVER give that kind of legal advice. Never.

As for the service she received, I disagree, this was not a perfected service, Arizona requires direct service, not service by mail, or service to address..

However, I do agree that fighting it is a losing battle, you go to court to fight the improper service, and you just get served there.

I would to the court house in the city in which she received her citation....

which would most like be one of the Phoenix metro area locations... or Pinal county...

and pay them.

[tranquility]

As for the service she received, I disagree, this was not a perfected service, Arizona requires direct service, not service by mail, or service to address..

Disagree (emphasis mine):
(d) Service of Summons Upon Individuals. Service upon an individual from whom a waiver has not been obtained and filed, other than those specified in paragraphs (e), (f) and (g) of this Rule 4.1, shall be effected by delivering a copy of the summons and of the pleading to that individual personally or by leaving copies thereof at that individual's dwelling house or usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein or by delivering a copy of the summons and of the pleading to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.

[Maestro64]

Originally Posted by fairisfair

perhaps cruise control might be a better idea. I would prefer that she stay UNDER the posted speed limit... not under the radar.

Boy your asking her to get in an accident or cause one. Face it going with the flow of traffic is far better than anything else. This systems are not about public safety, and more about how much money they can bring in. There are enough studies done the most people at least 85% will travel as speed that is reasonable and safe, thus the reason for setting speed limits at this point.

[The Occultist]

Originally Posted by Maestro64

Boy your asking her to get in an accident or cause one. Face it going with the flow of traffic is far better than anything else. This systems are not about public safety, and more about how much money they can bring in. There are enough studies done the most people at least 85% will travel as speed that is reasonable and safe, thus the reason for setting speed limits at this point.

On the stretch of highways in question (and I know this personally), the 85% speed is actually lower than the limit, and has been so since BEFORE the installation of these cameras. I've proven this to myself time and time again when I'm going exactly the speed limit and always seem to be going faster than the "flow of traffic". Anybody setting these cameras off truly deserve the tickets they get, IMHO.

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by Maestro64

Boy your asking her to get in an accident or cause one. Face it going with the flow of traffic is far better than anything else. This systems are not about public safety, and more about how much money they can bring in. There are enough studies done the most people at least 85% will travel as speed that is reasonable and safe, thus the reason for setting speed limits at this point.

Are you KIDDING me??? your suggestion was a way to allow her to continue to speed far in excess of the speed limit.

I drive the Phoenix metro area freeways EVERY DAY. My commute to(and from) work is exactly 109 miles... per day...yeah, that's right 109 miles... You follow the flow of traffic around here and you will spend your life in traffic court.

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by tranquility

Disagree (emphasis mine):
(d) Service of Summons Upon Individuals. Service upon an individual from whom a waiver has not been obtained and filed, other than those specified in paragraphs (e), (f) and (g) of this Rule 4.1, shall be effected by delivering a copy of the summons and of the pleading to that individual personally or by leaving copies thereof at that individual's dwelling house or usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein or by delivering a copy of the summons and of the pleading to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.

For the sake of argument.. and little else, I still disagree. The process server, according to the poster, did not leave the papers with a person of suitable age at the residence, but rather, left them on the doorstep.

[patstew]

Originally Posted by fairisfair

For the sake of argument.. and little else, I still disagree. The process server, according to the poster, did not leave the papers with a person of suitable age at the residence, but rather, left them on the doorstep.

At the feet of the person of suitable age who said they didn't want them. Basically, tough cojones -- they're yours.