Watch out for fake red light camera tickets, in California

[CdwJava]

In 2003 there was a bill in the legislature to make the camera tickets "owner responsibility," like it is on the east coast and midwest. And with a much smaller fine. But it got shot down, probably because it would have meant less money coming to the various agencies that have come to depend upon the revenue.

I recall the arguments revolving very little about the money and very much around the idea of charging an object for the actions of a person.

Though I do think that as red light cameras and photo radars increase in deployment, there is an increased likelihood of such a bill passing - especially in light of the budget deficits out here.

- Carl

 

[trashtalk]

They don't send out a real ticket initially, because it costs them $90 to have the camera company issue a real one, and that real ticket won't stick in court if it's sent to the wrong person or the face photo is blurry (if no fine is collected, the city loses $90). Only after the registered owner has filled-out the fake ticket form (disclosing the name of the actual driver) will the police issue a real ticket.

I recall reading that CA has been holding vehicle registration renewals hostage until the owner identifies the driver. True or false? Legal or not?

 

[seniorjudge]

I recall reading that CA has been holding vehicle registration renewals hostage until the owner identifies the driver. True or false? Legal or not?

I don't know if it's true or not but it would be legal. Driving is a privilege and the government gets to make the rules.

 

[trashtalk]

I concur that the legislature gets to make the rules. But I am not aware that the CA legislature has authorized the executive branch to hold registration renewals hostage. I contend that absent legislation authorizing this practice, and absent a creative interpretation of existing legislation by a state court, this practice not be legal.

With this clarification, do you still believe that holding registration renewals hostage is currently legal?

 

[CdwJava]

I concur that the legislature gets to make the rules. But I am not aware that the CA legislature has authorized the executive branch to hold registration renewals hostage. I contend that absent legislation authorizing this practice, and absent a creative interpretation of existing legislation by a state court, this practice not be legal.

With this clarification, do you still believe that holding registration renewals hostage is currently legal?

I do not believe it is currently the law ... Certainly not any that I have been informed of in this year's most recent legislative changes for 2005.

But! Something akin to this has been proposed in (I believe) the last year, and I would guess that within the next year or two something like this will be passed.

- Carl

 

[seniorjudge]

...With this clarification, do you still believe that holding registration renewals hostage is currently legal?...

What makes you think I believe that?

 

[trashtalk]

What makes you think I believe that?

I interpreted "would be legal" to mean "would be legal under current law". If you meant "would be legal under possible future laws", then your usage of "would be" is unconventional and virtually devoid of meaning. But then again, I'm not a lawyer, so perhaps there is another way to parse your earlier post. Anyway, I just wanted to know the answers, not start an argument where none exists.

 

[seniorjudge]

I interpreted "would be legal" to mean "would be legal under current law". If you meant "would be legal under possible future laws", then your usage of "would be" is unconventional and virtually devoid of meaning. But then again, I'm not a lawyer, so perhaps there is another way to parse your earlier post. Anyway, I just wanted to know the answers, not start an argument where none exists.

I don't know if it's true or not but it would be legal if such a law were passed.

You are correct.

In penance, I am whacking myself on the head with my copy of Legal Writing in Plain English, Bryan A Garner (University of Chicago Press, 2001).

 

[pfloydn]

So - I just got one in San Jose, California (I think)

It's a letter - on San Jose city letterhead titled 'Photo Radar Notification'. It does not include the address or phone number of a court - but instead wants me to mail my name, signature and DL image to the City of San Jose, DOT. They have a phone number - but it's a 1800 number that takes me to the company that processes the photos... No copy of the photo was included with the letter.

I'm hesitant to completely ignore the letter - but I agree, it is NOT a traffic citation and I'm unsure as to what action they could effectively take against me. I'd love to call them and ask if I can just deal with the court directly - without sending the city any more information. As I read through this again - it doesn't even claim to be issued by the police anywhere - just the city itself...

Anyway - I'll try calling the photo company tomorrow, to ask them what they claim will happen if I just ignore it. They're closed at the moment.

Any comments? Feel free to send me mail at: [email protected]

-Pete

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

What's on everybody's mind - besides sex

Question: Can a city mess with your registration if you don't reply to a notice asking you to contact the PD and identify the driver in a photo of a moving violation (a notice that is not a real ticket as it has not been filed with the court and does not have the court's address on it)?

Answer: No, they cannot. The only time a city can mess with your registration is for parking tickets.

Prove it: The DMV recently answered this exact question. The correspondence is in the Fake Ticket section on the Your Ticket page of the website http://www.highwayrobbery.net

Question: Then what do you do with such a notice?

Answer: Ignore it.

Not A Cop Or Lawyer... Or A Judge

 

[trashtalk]

Thanks so much for the detailed info. It's good to know that the DMV does not hold the registration hostage for a fake ticket, only a real one.

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

More about ignoring real tickets

It appears they don't suspend for a REAL camera ticket either - as long as you have not acknowledged receipt of it. All that seems to happen is that you get threatening letters from a collection agency.

But if you acknowledge receipt, even by something as minor as phoning the court and taking an extension, and then you fail to follow up, they will suspend your license AND send you the nasty collection letters.

If you're not too sure you want to blindly follow advice received on the 'net, you could check it out yourself, as follows. Go to the courthouse where the camera tickets are heard. At the traffic dept. there should be a special window for tickets that are in collection. It may say GC Services. Get in the line and talk to the dedendants who have camera tickets.

Not a Cop or Lawyer... or a Judge

 

[Alchohol_Free]

Fake Red Light Tickets

I read a bunch of info on this, and apparently, what the CA cities are doing is making yellow lights supershort so if a car enters an intersection under green the light turns red before the car completely exits the intersection. The camera, conveniently mouted on the Red light side takes the snapshot.

I can only imagine the propositions that are going to be on the next CA ballot.

 

[NotACopOrLawyer]

No ticket if you enter on green or yellow!

It doesn't matter WHAT color the light is once you're in the intersection. All that is required is that you do not enter (cross the limit line) after the signal has turned red.

That's important to know, for two reasons.

1. Drivers who stop too early, before the guy behind them expects it, risk getting rear ended.

2. Driver's who stop too early at left turns contribute to traffic congestion - and frustrate the drivers behind them. For example -

Let's pretend that you and a car in front of you are waiting to turn left at a place where there's no left turn arrow. If you move up close to the guy in front so that part of your car is past the limit line before the signal goes red, you have the right-of-way and can complete your turn during the red.

Some other day, when it is you in the car in front, try to pull far enough forward so the guy behind you (maybe it will be me) can get through too! I, and everyone else waiting in the left-turn pocket, will thank you.

 

[CdwJava]

Maybe the camera can't get you for being in the intersection when the light turns, but an officer can.

- Carl