Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

NSW Got a ticket for filtering

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by dft, Feb 25, 2010.

  1. Motorcycle Police officer pulled me over for passing on the left of stationary cars.

    Ticket says 'Overtaking on the left'.
    Is there any hazy bit in NSW road law that could lead to me getting out of this?

    Bloody expensive for a minor traffice offense too, $141.

  2. I just checked and it does look like NSW put the Australian Road Safety Rules into place back in 2008 so the 141(C) is in place.

    I'll appeal it and quote that. No harm in trying.
  3. so "dft" doesn't stand for Don't Filter Traffic, then?
  4. Haha nice. It's my initials
  5. I'd write an appeal noting you overtook a vehicle in its lane, to the right of it. Specifically noting you were not in the lane to the right of you, but in the lane to the left, and that the vehicle had its indicator on and was turning left. Its legal to overtake a vehicle in its lane if its turning left and safe to do so.
  6. If they don't change it to "failing to indicate" or "crossing an unbroken white line" then you probably have a pretty good chance if NSW has implemented the ARR.

    You will also have to make it very clear that none of the traffic was moving and that it was "safe to do so".
  7. It is no longer a requirement for the other vehicle to be turning. But it has to be stationary, safe to do so and it is a requirement for you to indicate. All of these conditions need to be met before considering taking to to court.
    (Why would he claim to have overtaken on the right when he was booked for overtaking on the left?)

    If so, there's a good chance the OP can make the cop look like a goose for not keeping up with road law changes.
  8. oooh I like that - it sounds exciting

    ticket says "overtaking on left " sounds a big vague to me

    imagine on a freeway you get a ticket because in the left lane you are doing 110 and the person in the right lane is doing 80 and you pass them --- your still overtaking on the left are you not

    scratch that - it doesnt apply to multi lane roads

    I dont think they had "stationary in traffic" in mind when they wrote the legislation - more applicable as stationary due to be parked etc

    BUT because all they say is "stationary" and give no other parameters i would take my chances in court and try to get out of it quoting the exact words of the legislation but then the courts will look at the "safe to do so " aspect which is very open to subjective interpretation, what you and I may consider safe may not be considered so by the courts
  9. I don't think they had much in mind when they wrote the legislation (or maybe we had an insider). But that's to our advantage.

    What I'd like is some legal opinion on whether the cop needs to have included some kind of reference to whether he deemed the move unsafe when issuing the infringement, or whether he can just introduce that when he is in court (?)
    I wouldn't be flagging that strategy to them in advance.
  10. I think the ability to introduce something after the fact reeks of for lack of a better description "evidence tampering"
  11. Does anybody know whether you need to leave your indicator on for the whole time you are overtaking on the left of stationary vehicles? Or do you indicate your move to the left, and then indicate again when you rejoin the flow of traffic?
  12. My view is that you only indicate to show that you are about to undertake a change of direction - you then turn it off and indicate again when you undertake another change.

    There's noting in the road rules to say you should leave it on. Although I think this needs some confirmation from the legal type people around here.
  13. Lets back up a step.
    IF this went to court the police MUST provide a copy of the brief of evidence to the defence before the case.
    They cannot rely on "new" evidence" after this time.
    What they can do is expand on evidence once in the witness box.
    There is NO legal obligation for the police to tell you anything until the brief.
  14. I'd say that was the correct interpretation.
  15. Thanks Tony & Tramp. That is basically what I've been doing, but it is good to know that I'm on the right track.

    I'd be really interested to see how this plays out. I've been carrying a copy of rule 141 around with me on my bike, but I'm half-afraid to use it if I ever do get pulled over. I suspect that the police officer would take it as me being cheeky and then hunt around for something else to ping me with. And the 'if safe to do so' clause is a bit dicey. John (raven) got done a few months ago for a 'dangerous' overtake because the police car coming the other way thought that he'd cut it a bit close. John reckons he was well in the clear, but all it takes is the police officer in question to stand up in court and say "In my professional opinion that move was unsafe" and you're in for a fight.

    I'm starting to think that the smart thing to do is be very meek, collect a ticket saying "overtaking on left", and then front up in court and use the 141 (c) as a defence.
  16. Tramp - Theoretically speaking, if someone were to write to the issuing authority appealing against a charge on 'X' grounds (and it wasn't withdrawn), would that information be passed to the prosecution or the police officer, thus enabling them to prepare their prosecution to defeat your defense?

    Given they have to show you their court brief, do you have to show them your defense?
  17. I'm going to appeal it with the State Debt Recovery Office before it goes to court. If that doesn't work i'll just take it on the chin. Not worth going to court and wasting time over $141.
  18. Especially when its costs a $50 non refundable amount.

    Those SDRO f@#$ers piss me off so hard. They (incorrectly) slapped me with an extra $50 charge for not paying the fine, but I was in correspondenance with them via letter of appeal. I wrote to them about this BS extra charge and they confirmed they were in correspondance with me and that it was incorrect but they said I have to take it to court for it to be considered.. and it costs a non refundable $50 amout to go to court.. you can't win with those asshats. I seriously want to gain employment there and mess $hit up from the inside..

  19. I think that this rule is to cover the situation where a there is a one lane road and a car is turning right. It allows other traffic to pass on the left whilst the car turning right is stationary and waiting.

    That being said, exploit their vague definition as much as possible.