Speed Camera News RTA action over speeding fine 'appalling'
Thanks to CameraFraud for the heads up.
RTA action over speeding fine 'appalling'
BY EMMA SPILLETT
09 Sep, 2011 04:00 AM
The Roads and Traffic Authority knew John Jo Eastwood was not driving his car when it was caught by a speed camera in Gwynneville.
Yet, the RTA continued to prosecute him.
The traffic body conceded that Mr Eastwood's mother Gail was behind the wheel when it was snapped in December 2009, but it still went after him for the $197 fine and demerit points.
All because he failed to follow the RTA's interpretation of a legislative provision, claiming car owners have just 21 days after a notice is posted to nominate another driver, or the registered owner is forced to cop the penalty - even if they can establish they weren't behind the wheel.
In his defence, Mr Eastwood, of Bondi Beach, did not receive the fine until March 2010.
This was nearly four months after the original offence, as he had moved several times and the penalty notice and further reminders had been posted to his former addresses.
In May last year, the State Debt Recovery office rejected his application to have the matter annulled, sighting his failure to nominate another driver within the legislative time limit.
After successfully appealing to a Sydney court, Mr Eastwood's matter was heard in Wollongong in January this year and the RTA did not dispute that his mother was driving the car.
Judge Paul Conlon yesterday slammed the transport body, labelling its actions "appalling".
"The message from the RTA seems to be, don't let the interests of justice stand in the way of securing a $197 penalty notice and having demerit points attach to the licence of a person who did not commit the offence," he said.
Delivering an appeal judgment in the matter, Judge Conlon told the court there had been little in dispute between the RTA and Mr Eastwood about who was driving the car, yet he was still prosecuted.
"I find it appalling that the RTA can give instructions to its legal representative to [attempt to] hold a conviction based on their interpretation of a legislation provision while at the same time conceding that the appellant was not the driver," he said.
The judge dismissed the fine and demerit points.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Articles Menu
Find Info
Latest Comments
Member Login
