red light ticket, need help to see if i can get it dismissed

[949]

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

Jefferson Parish, Louisiana

i just got a tick by a photo red light enforcement program.

i says the vehicle i own ran a red light.

i was curious if there was a way to fight it.

story:

i left my family a new car for them to use because of the hurricane. the car is registered under my name for right now. i live in california. the car will come back when they get a chance to buy a new car. so anyways, the whole family drives it daily. on the day the picture was taken no one was sure who was the driver.

i personally was not the driver and about 4 or 5 different drivers could have been the driver that say. being that there is no picture of the actual driver, is there a way to get this ticket dismissed?

ordinance:
code of ordinances of jefferson parish, louisiana
section 36-307

description:
proceeding into intersection on a red light signal.

location:
veterans blvd and carrollton ave.


thanks for any help.

[The Occultist]

All you need to do is show that you were not driving the vehicle. Moving violations are assigned to the operator of the vehicle (which is different from parking violations, which are assigned to the registered owner). Simply prove that you were not driving (or even show that they can't prove you were driving), and the ticket should be dismissed. Also note that despite any pressure they may put on you, you are not actually required to state who was driving (and, according to your story, I'm sure a simple "I don't know" may truly be an honest answer).

[949]

Originally Posted by The Occultist

All you need to do is show that you were not driving the vehicle. Moving violations are assigned to the operator of the vehicle (which is different from parking violations, which are assigned to the registered owner). Simply prove that you were not driving (or even show that they can't prove you were driving), and the ticket should be dismissed. Also note that despite any pressure they may put on you, you are not actually required to state who was driving (and, according to your story, I'm sure a simple "I don't know" may truly be an honest answer).

thank you for your reponse.

in the rear of the ticket it s has "options".

one of the options i am concerned about is option "B".

here is a scan of the rear of the ticket.

does it mean i need to point out 'someone/anyone' to be the driver?


http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i2...9/SCAN0015.jpg

[The Occultist]

If that notice is accurate, then it appears that I am mistaken and you, as the registered owner, can indeed be found liable, and apparently you must give them the name of the person you believe was driving the vehicle at the time.

I might make a phone call or two to attorneys local to the area in which the violation occurred and see if any further insight may be offered.

[I_Got_Banned]

Initially, I did actually question the legitimacy & legality of that notice based on one line that I caught in it… It states:
“No record of this violation will be sent to your insurance company of the Department of Motor Vehicles upon a conviction or plea”.

What kind of Red light Camera Citation/an actual moving violation is NOT reported to the DMV. I’m not saying they are lying and that they will report it. I am only saying that I would question the legitimacy of their ability to impose fines under the pretense of a moving violation if they are not somehow related to and under a requirement to report to -at the least- the DMV.

But then a little more research led me to this:

From The WACKY Municipal Code of Ordinances – Jefferson Parish, Louisiana

Section 36-313
Effect of liability.
The imposition of a penalty under this ordinance constitutes an alternative method of detecting and deterring red-light violations. No fine imposed hereunder for such violations will result in notification to the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, to the vehicle owner's insurance company or to the insurance company of any person on whom a fine is imposed under this article. An owner who fails to pay the fine and/or enforcement costs imposed under this article or to timely contest liability for said fines and/or costs shall be considered to have admitted liability for the full amount of the fines and costs stated in the notice of violation mailed to the person and the matter will be turned over to the district attorney's office for further prosecution and collection. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

And then I also came across this:

Section 36-313
Exoneration of registered owner.
The registered owner of a vehicle that proceeds into an intersection when the traffic signal for that vehicle's direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal who alleges that he was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the violation has the responsibility through sworn statement to prove that someone else other than the vehicle owner was driving the vehicle at the time the violation occurred. The vehicle owner's sworn statement must provide the name, address, and contact phone number for the person whom the vehicle owner alleges was driving the vehicle. Failure to file a statement with the proper information will result in owner's continued liability for any fines and costs assessed for the violation. In addition, failure of the person alleged by the vehicle owner to have been driving the vehicle at the time of the violation to pay any and all fines or costs assessed for said violation shall result in the continued liability of the vehicle owner for said fines and costs. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

Here's a link to the full Muni code: [url]http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp?pid=14447&sid=18[/url]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news… But it sounds to me like you’re gonna pay either way.

By the way, does the name Redflex appear anywhere on that notice?

Because... Speaking of legality... take a look at this document.
[url]http://nowner.phpwebhosting.com/archives/sevin-complaint.pdf[/url]

Looks like a class action suit... dated April 2, 2008. But more importantly, it lists the names of 2 attorney’s who might be able to shed some more light (no pun intended) on the document but also on a few issues that are connected to the legality of the entire system run by Redflex and any violation notices issued by them. Scroll through it and you’ll see what I mean.

Like the Occultist said... I say... Call an attorney... or two!

[949]

thanks guys im on the phone today to find out.

after a quick look i dont see any "redflex" wording on either paper.



ill be back in a few to post up what i find out.
if you guys find anything else or talk to anyone else please let me know asap as they say i need to send this back in a week.

[949]

i just made the call this morning.

the customer rep seemed kinda nicer then i expected. i actually would think she would be an assholle but she wasnt.

i did tell her my situation and she said that the law there states that the driver is responsible but again she is representing REDFLEX.

she did say i could go to court to fight it, she said all i needed to say was that i was not driving. she didnt get into issue about me pointing out the other driver too much other then the registered owner is responsible. she didnt say i would lose the case if i stuck to my testimony of me not driving it.

i did also make a call to the lawyers who are taking care of the class action lawsuit. i am waiting on them to call me back.

[949]

just missed the call back from one of the lawyers in the class action law suit.


ill talk to him today again and come back soon with a response.

Section 36-313
Effect of liability.
The imposition of a penalty under this ordinance constitutes an alternative method of detecting and deterring red-light violations. No fine imposed hereunder for such violations will result in notification to the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, to the vehicle owner's insurance company or to the insurance company of any person on whom a fine is imposed under this article. An owner who fails to pay the fine and/or enforcement costs imposed under this article or to timely contest liability for said fines and/or costs shall be considered to have admitted liability for the full amount of the fines and costs stated in the notice of violation mailed to the person and the matter will be turned over to the district attorney's office for further prosecution and collection. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

This law admits what many people have fought and won in cases across the USA. Mailed non-criminal civil actions. Are like someone mailing service on a civil suit. If they get a default judgement and try to collect. It easy to have a court set aside a default judgement unless served in person. The district attorney's office for further prosecution and collection. Scares you into paying. Case law in other states are a good idea to look up before sending in a dispute and possible waiver of in person service.

Section 36-313
Exoneration of registered owner.
The registered owner of a vehicle that proceeds into an intersection when the traffic signal for that vehicle's direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal who alleges that he was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the violation has the responsibility through sworn statement to prove that someone else other than the vehicle owner was driving the vehicle at the time the violation occurred. The vehicle owner's sworn statement must provide the name, address, and contact phone number for the person whom the vehicle owner alleges was driving the vehicle. Failure to file a statement with the proper information will result in owner's continued liability for any fines and costs assessed for the violation. In addition, failure of the person alleged by the vehicle owner to have been driving the vehicle at the time of the violation to pay any and all fines or costs assessed for said violation shall result in the continued liability of the vehicle owner for said fines and costs. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

Read the United States Constitution and then see if you take them serious on forced signing a sworn document.

Is the car registered in California? if yes, most case law across the USA point out successfull challenges to these tickets on jurisdictional grounds! Even easier to challenge some county trying to serve you in California with what is basically a civil suit.

[CanItakeThe5th]

O.K. Just a little background to let you know where I'm coming from. I'm a retired cop and disabled. My car is registered to BOTH me and my wife.
I never received the first notice in the mail, only a second notice telling me I was in default on paying my fine in 30 days or contesting the violation which I never even knew I had incurred. It further said my failure to respond in 30 days constituted a waiver of my right to contest the violation.
I called the "Customer Service Center" (strange name huh?) and explained to the lady who answered that I had never gotten a 1st notice or summons for a traffic violation and had no Idea who was driving, as our son and daughter in-law both drive also from time to time getting things from the store for us as both my wife and I are disabled and have trouble getting around at times.
The woman was nice, but insisted that since the car was registered to me, blah,blah,blah. She sent me out a copy of the original which I got in the mail yesterday.
The problem I have is as follows:
1)
Section 36-313
Effect of liability.
The imposition of a penalty under this ordinance constitutes an alternative method of detecting and deterring red-light violations. No fine imposed hereunder for such violations will result in notification to the Louisiana Department of Motor Vehicles, to the vehicle owner's insurance company or to the insurance company of any person on whom a fine is imposed under this article. An owner who fails to pay the fine and/or enforcement costs imposed under this article or to timely contest liability for said fines and/or costs shall be considered to have admitted liability for the full amount of the fines and costs stated in the notice of violation mailed to the person and the matter will be turned over to the district attorney's office for further prosecution and collection. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

As a retired cop, I am totally outraged that I have been deemed to have "admitted liability" to anything. I admit nothing! Have these people never heard of the 5th amendment?

2)
I got no personal service of the violation. This was a video taken of our vehicle running a red light. I do not contest that, but it wasn't as though I got pulled over and personally served at the time. What about proof that I was in actual physical control of the vehicle? The violation occurred in January. It's now over half way through March. I don't know who was driving.

3)
Section 36-313
Exoneration of registered owner.
The registered owner of a vehicle that proceeds into an intersection when the traffic signal for that vehicle's direction of travel is emitting a steady red signal who alleges that he was not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the violation has the responsibility through sworn statement to prove that someone else other than the vehicle owner was driving the vehicle at the time the violation occurred. The vehicle owner's sworn statement must provide the name, address, and contact phone number for the person whom the vehicle owner alleges was driving the vehicle. Failure to file a statement with the proper information will result in owner's continued liability for any fines and costs assessed for the violation. In addition, failure of the person alleged by the vehicle owner to have been driving the vehicle at the time of the violation to pay any and all fines or costs assessed for said violation shall result in the continued liability of the vehicle owner for said fines and costs. (Ord. No. 23083, § 1, 6-20-07)

O.K Here is the problem with the above "Exoneration".
This sounds like some type of Kangaroo Court.
What? I have to prove my innocence? I thought the burden of proof was on the court, not the accused. Do they think this is France?
If I wasn't driving, I am forced to testify against my wife as the co-owner?
Since I don't think I was driving (I don't remember being in that part of town) am I required to name another offender for THEM? I don't work for them, its not my job to testify against anyone else, especially since I have no idea who was driving.
Why was I alone identified as the offender here? Our vehicle registration clearly list both myself AND my wife as the ownerS.
Did someone just flip a coin and decide to cite me instead of my wife?
The JP sheriff's deputy, badge number 116090 signed a sworn affidavit that he saw the pictures and that a violation had occurred.
I note that he did not say that I was the one who was driving.

4)
So I am deemed guilty without due process as in a regular trial.
I am told that I can avoid a $110.00 fine plus $25.00 "late fee" plus who knows how much (on my experience as an officer for the court about $100.00 I guess) more for "court cost" if I contest this "traffic violation"; if I will just accuse someone else of driving the vehicle. WHAT?????
What kind of "court" will hear this? It sure doesn't sound like it will be regular traffic court in Jefferson Parish, as I was not issued a traffic citation.
I am denied the right to confront my accusers because there are none.
In summation, I would sincerely like a bit of advice here. We are poor folk. I cannot afford an attorney, much less the cost of this so called "traffic violation" where I was not issued a ticket, there was no personal service to me of this notice, no witness to accuse me, only to accuse the vehicle.
I know this is 2009 and they have all kinds of high tech stuff like there red light videos, but since they can't put me behind the wheel it seems more like 1984.
By what authority do they do this, as the title asks?
Everything I have recieved as a demand from these people appears to violate my 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendmant right under the U.S. Condtitution.

Please help.
Thanks
John
Marrero, Louisiana

[I_Got_Banned]

CanITakeThe5th, it is understandable the the citation was received in the same jurisdiction, the you are charged with the same offense and that you are facing similar issues as the original Person who started this thread, it is advisable that you start you own New Thread.


Copy and paste this link into your browser bar: [url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=13[/url]
Copy the information you posted in this thread...
And paste your post there...

[CanItakeThe5th]

I_Got_Banned - Thanks for the advice. I did just that. There is a big difference in the issue of the registered owner however. In my case there are 2 registed owners, yet they sent the notice of violation to me only. Thanks again. I hope someone can help me out here.