AFP Speeding fines - reasonable speeds?

Ceej1973 said :

Under the speed limit- whay book someone for going to slow, i.e. tractors. That is what broken and unbroken road markings are for (over taking advice).

If your vehicle can’t (tractor, cyclist, whatever) it doesn’t matter. Its only an issue if you choose to go needlessly slowly.

.

Ceej1973 said :

School zones – I saw a kid yesterday that was run over by a car going at walking pace, the kid was going at running pace. Luckily he stood back up.
Under the speed limit- whay book someone for going to slow, i.e. tractors. That is what broken and unbroken road markings are for (over taking advice).
Speeding- one would expect that you should be paying most attention to whats on the other side of the windscreen, not looking at the speedo 100% of the time. So being booked for anything over 10% is just stupid and picky, assuming your average driver also knows the approx. speed travelled based on revs/gear sound.

Oops. I meant “anything under 10% over the limit”

School zones – I saw a kid yesterday that was run over by a car going at walking pace, the kid was going at running pace. Luckily he stood back up.
Under the speed limit- whay book someone for going to slow, i.e. tractors. That is what broken and unbroken road markings are for (over taking advice).
Speeding- one would expect that you should be paying most attention to whats on the other side of the windscreen, not looking at the speedo 100% of the time. So being booked for anything over 10% is just stupid and picky, assuming your average driver also knows the approx. speed travelled based on revs/gear sound.

Tooks said :

You’re not ever going to get booked doing 1kmh over the limit, so you won’t ever have to worry about it.

And if it does happen, you could always explain to the court that you were only breaking the law just a little bit.

Ado said :

I know this post is getting old, but I’m slow!

The OP was about cops issuing tickets, so I stand by the following two comments:

1) If you were told by ANYONE there is a 10% rule on police tickets, you have been misled.

2) If I get a ticket from any source for going 1kmh over the posted limit I will take the matter to court and I will win.

You’re not ever going to get booked doing 1kmh over the limit, so you won’t ever have to worry about it.

I know this post is getting old, but I’m slow!

The OP was about cops issuing tickets, so I stand by the following two comments:

1) If you were told by ANYONE there is a 10% rule on police tickets, you have been misled.

2) If I get a ticket from any source for going 1kmh over the posted limit I will take the matter to court and I will win.

Tooks said :

I realise you’re probably just fishing for a bite, but if you honestly can’t see why discretion is important, then you’re not really using your noggin.

hey who you calling a troll? how rude! 🙂

discretion is a complicated issue.

at best it can be used to temper the worst excesses of the law.

at worst selective enforcement can (and has in the past) been used to target minorities and the vulnerable with vexatious charges.

cleo said :

Gee and I get a parking fine for being parked for less than a minute.

You’ve learned a valuable lesson then.

farq said :

Tooks said :

So you’re saying book everyone doing 61 in a 60; everyone failing to indicate; everyone running an amber light etc etc. Every crime committed gets prosecuted (minor theft, damage, littering, urinating in public). Yeah, sounds great.

well if that is the law, why not book’em? if the law is so important, why not apply it in all cases?

could it be if the law was applied as written it would be an farce?

maybe discretion is just to cover the fact we have bad laws that are too broad.

I realise you’re probably just fishing for a bite, but if you honestly can’t see why discretion is important, then you’re not really using your noggin.

Gee and I get a parking fine for being parked for less than a minute.

Tooks said :

So you’re saying book everyone doing 61 in a 60; everyone failing to indicate; everyone running an amber light etc etc. Every crime committed gets prosecuted (minor theft, damage, littering, urinating in public). Yeah, sounds great.

well if that is the law, why not book’em? if the law is so important, why not apply it in all cases?

could it be if the law was applied as written it would be an farce?

maybe discretion is just to cover the fact we have bad laws that are too broad.

Aurelius – by god am I glad you’re not a lawyer. Your interpretation of ‘what the law says’ is the most simplistic and reductive strawman argument I’ve seen used on this forum (perhaps with the exception of the whole ‘gay marriage is just the same as incestuous marriage’ thing).

Aaargh, discretion, not INdiscretion!

Needhelp @73: Maybe see if mods will post it up (if you’re willing). I assume it only relates to speed cameras.

Aurelius said :

As to the question of discretion, yes Tooks, I believe discretion should be removed. The law is, after all, the law and I know officers who first make a decision to book an individual, and then find a way to carry out that decision. I assume you could name officers like that as well.

So you’re saying book everyone doing 61 in a 60; everyone failing to indicate; everyone running an amber light etc etc. Every crime committed gets prosecuted (minor theft, damage, littering, urinating in public). Yeah, sounds great.

And no, I don’t know any officers like that and how would removing their power of indiscretion help in any way?

As to the question of discretion, yes Tooks, I believe discretion should be removed. The law is, after all, the law and I know officers who first make a decision to book an individual, and then find a way to carry out that decision. I assume you could name officers like that as well.

Jim, I never said the laws should or shouldn’t be there. I said they should only be there if there is a reason, and I was suggesting the reason was safety. Can you provide an alternate reason? If not, then they’re there for safety.
And if they’re there for safety, then my wet-weather scenario question remains open – the 60/61 safe/unsafe line is there in dry weather, so is it the same in wet weather? I cannot see how it would be. And if it isn’t, then why are the limits set where they are?
See Jim, this is the problem. We have laws saying 60 is safe, and 61 isn’t, regardless of the conditions. Yet clearly, the conditions matter, a lot.

VeryBusy – I have a written response from the ACT Policing telling me about the 10% rule and how it came about. It’s quite detailed. I am very happy to forward it to you at a nominated email address. Just say the word. You can then ask for an explanation as to why your friend was ticketed at only 5km over the limit in an 80 zone. Thanks.

So, Aurelius, you want to abolish the laws regarding speeding because they “don’t make sense”?

Surely no-one is that stupid.

georgesgenitals said :

Tooks said :

Aurelius said :

In reply to SpecialG at #59 – it’s true the discretion of the officer is a large determining factor. What VG has shown us here and in other threads is that discretion should not lie with the officer – because sometimes individual officers are not worthy to make such judgments.

So police officers shouldn’t have discretion?

I know one who clearly doesn’t. Apparently he hands out speeding tickets for 61 in a 60 zone.

I think you’ll find vg was probably taking the piss; as usual, he got a few bites

ExFeds said :

Buzz….I haven’t received any sort of ticket/s in years HAHAHAHA just wanted an opinion!

That wasn’t the question, are you ex-AFP?

Tooks said :

Aurelius said :

In reply to SpecialG at #59 – it’s true the discretion of the officer is a large determining factor. What VG has shown us here and in other threads is that discretion should not lie with the officer – because sometimes individual officers are not worthy to make such judgments.

So police officers shouldn’t have discretion?

I know one who clearly doesn’t. Apparently he hands out speeding tickets for 61 in a 60 zone.

Buzz….I haven’t received any sort of ticket/s in years HAHAHAHA just wanted an opinion!

Tooks said :

Aurelius said :

In reply to SpecialG at #59 – it’s true the discretion of the officer is a large determining factor. What VG has shown us here and in other threads is that discretion should not lie with the officer – because sometimes individual officers are not worthy to make such judgments.

So police officers shouldn’t have discretion?

The option there would be to take the discretion away and a ticket would follow on every occasion.

As for the 60km/h is safe and 61km/h is not safe – yes this is true and that is why the speed limit on that particular road has been set as such. The road engineers have determined this – eg suburban streets lower speed as high speeds are ‘unsafe’. Hence stop signs instead of give ways at some intersections – traffic collision stats show that people can’t make the right choices and mostly drive with their heads firmly planted in their bum. Hence other people have to take some of those choices away.

You need to draw a line in the sand sometimes.

Could you imagine a sign with “speed limit 50-90km/h depending on the time of day, number of pedestrians and vehicular traffic, light and weather conditions but basically use your judgement because we know you will make the right decision.”

Aurelius said :

In reply to SpecialG at #59 – it’s true the discretion of the officer is a large determining factor. What VG has shown us here and in other threads is that discretion should not lie with the officer – because sometimes individual officers are not worthy to make such judgments.

So police officers shouldn’t have discretion?

Jim,
Are you denying the speeding law is there because of safety concerns?
If not, why is it there?
Unfortunately, in this country, we seem to have forgotten that the ‘why’ of laws is more important than the ‘what’. If a law does not make sense, it should be dispensed with. If you cannot justify a law’s enforcement beyond “because it’s the law”, then perhaps you should be asking why it is the law.
I am not arguing that 60 is safe, and 61 in unsafe. I am questioning that, if the previous sentence is untrue, why the law is what it is?
A law that does make sense should be easily explained as to why we have it.
A law that doesn’t make sense should be abolished.
The same as a few weeks ago, on this site, we discussed the appicability of the mobile phone while driving law, and it was pointed out that it is legal to talk on a phone while driving if the vehicle is a police vehicle. Yet the same reasoning applies – if we’re told that driving with a mobile is unsafe, why is it supposedly not unsafe when the vehicle concerned is registered to a certain government department?
Traffic laws exist for safety, don’t they? They’re the basis for our speed laws, drink driving laws, licencing laws, right-of-way laws. Everything we do when driving.
Or do they exist for some other purpose?

Aurelius said :

If you have a stretch of road that has a limit of 60, what the law is saying is that at 60, it is safe, and at 61 (according to VG) it is unsafe.

The law doesn’t “say” that at all.

What the law says is “here is the speed limit, go over this and you’ll cop a fine”.

Aurelius said :

vg, you’re now claiming that 61 in a 60 zone is safe? or unsafe?
If it’s safe, then you agree the law should change. If it’s unsafe, then you agreed with what I said at #53.
So which is it?

Apart from the fact that you’re using a false dichotomy (as if there’s an absolute distinction between ‘safe’ and ‘not safe’ – disregarding the fact that speed is not the sole issue regarding safety, nor did vg state that this is the case).

According to your logic, we should do away with speed limits entirely because “surely an extra km per hour speed can’t hurt.

Why not have people whizzing through school zones at 140km? Speed doesn’t kill, that’s just evil communist government propaganda to divert us from the oncoming new world order that the UN will install when they invade … etc.

It’s not hard really, there are posted speed limits, if you go over these, you may get pinged.

In NSW, the speed cameras are set at the limit, plus 10%. Sure, you can be booked for 1km/h over, but the cameras are set at that.
Also in NSW, the bandwidths of “Exceed by 0-15, 16-30, 31-45” etc which dictate the number of points and dollars you forfeit may have recently changed to 0-10, 11-20 etc. Not sure but I know they were considering it, and recent trips on NSW roads, with their warning signs, indicate those changes may have already happened.
In reality, HWP officers in NSW tended to have their radar alerts set for 75 in a 60; 95 in an 80 etc, or at least they did 10 years ago.
What the ACT cops set them for I don’t know.

In reply to SpecialG at #59 – it’s true the discretion of the officer is a large determining factor. What VG has shown us here and in other threads is that discretion should not lie with the officer – because sometimes individual officers are not worthy to make such judgments.

NeedHelp said :

VeryBusy – All I know is that I was told the 10% rule, and the Traffic Representations people at the AFP confirmed it all after I asked lots of questions. The calibration of the speed camera may have been “out” and in need of a service – it could have been detecting incorrect speeds. They do service them but I don’t know how often.

Thats cool, but the fact is that the 10% thing is definately not a rule. It could be a guideline used buy SOME in the policing industry but it is not something that should be relied upon by motorists wanting to avoid an infringement notice.

The calibration of the camera is irrelevant. Right or wrong, the camera thought my friends speed was 85 and he was fined on that basis.

vg, you’re now claiming that 61 in a 60 zone is safe? or unsafe?
If it’s safe, then you agree the law should change. If it’s unsafe, then you agreed with what I said at #53.
So which is it?

I’m thinking Exfeds is not quite getting it. Anything over 80km/h in an 80km/h zone is speeding and can get you a ticket. No one will tell you otherwise. There is not a set 10%/5,10,20km/h over rule or anything.

It is up to the individual officers discretion whether he:
a – waves a finger at you to slow down
b – pulls you over
c – cautions you
d – gives you a ticket
e – sends you to court
f – gives you a ticket and finds half a dozen other things to give you tickets for and defects your car with a yellow sticker on you windscreen before sending you on your merry way.

ExFeds said :

If you were standing on the side of a hwy with a laser speed device, would you hand out a ticket for 90Km/h in an 80Km/H zone? What would be your threshold? 15over? 20over?

90km/h in an 80 zone should get a ticket, why not?

What would your threshold be?

Why do you need to know? Disgruntled self important person who got a ticket, wont take it to court, thinks he can solve the world in an anonymous public forum?

You should just be thankful that the Police are out there. I’m sure when you need them you will call them, then probably give them a hard time because they can’t solve who slashed your tires.

VeryBusy – All I know is that I was told the 10% rule, and the Traffic Representations people at the AFP confirmed it all after I asked lots of questions. The calibration of the speed camera may have been “out” and in need of a service – it could have been detecting incorrect speeds. They do service them but I don’t know how often.

If you were standing on the side of a hwy with a laser speed device, would you hand out a ticket for 90Km/h in an 80Km/H zone? What would be your threshold? 15over? 20over?

Blingerific lucky friend (dont see how true that is, wife’s tale I think like the 10% rule). Next time they might check there speedo first at the markers on the barton highway.

Dean most cars I have driven have been 3 to 4kphs lower than the speedo. The best was a VW. Was doing 100kph on speedo but true speed was 85kph.

ricci said :

vg appears to be one of those who give the police a bad name. I hope there are not too many like him in the force. In general the ones I have know, and have met, are polite and reasonable which engenders a spirit of cooperation. Time for him to retire I would think.

Yeah that’s me, how did you figure me out so easily.

I could also be one of those guys who mercilessly takes the piss to get responses such as this. I might not even be a cop, I could be a robber.

By the way Aurelius, nice words in the mouth. Please point out precisely where I said 1km/h over the speed limit was ‘unsafe’. Or are you one of those ‘contextual conversers’.

This joint is like shooting fish in a barrel some days

If you have a stretch of road that has a limit of 60, what the law is saying is that at 60, it is safe, and at 61 (according to VG) it is unsafe.
But on a rainy day, that same road is still safe at 60, is it? And unsafe at 61?
Surely a road that has a safe/unsafe line at 60 in the dry has a different point of safety/unsafety when it’s raining?

vg appears to be one of those who give the police a bad name. I hope there are not too many like him in the force. In general the ones I have know, and have met, are polite and reasonable which engenders a spirit of cooperation. Time for him to retire I would think.

If you can’t tell the difference between 60 and 70 without even looking at the speedo then time to hand in you licence. How long does it take to speed check anyway? A flick of your eyes. Then adjust your speed accordingly. Throw in a check of your mirrors and some indicating regularly too, why not? add some variety to your driving technique.

As for how far over the speed limit you need to drive to get a ticket. Technically 1km/h -likelyhood – not high. It all depends on where you are driving, when you are driving there and what your driving history and attitude is like when you get stopped. Having a licence actually helps as well.

anything over 40km/h at school drop off and pick up time – you are likely to get a ticket. 110km/h on the tuggers parkway at 3am on a clear night – you might get a caution.
Speed cameras don’t have the human element so you speed you get a fine.

luther_bendross said :

While we’re talking about speeds, am I the only one here who has seen the changed speed limits on roadworks (particularly Parkes Way @ Russell and the Glenloch Interchange)? It frustrates the holy crap out of me when I sit on 88km/h in the 90km/h zone on Parkes Way, then slow down according to the changed speeds only to be overtaken by some moron still doing 90km/h. Then when I get into the 100km/h zone on Tuggers Parkway said moron is still doing 90km/h in the right hand lane while I’m trying to get near 100km/h without overtaking the moron on the left.

My general theme here through these convoluted sentences is:
1. Stick to the limit
2. Get in the freaking left hand lane if you’re not overtaking.

Actually while I’m here, that funny stick on your steering column is for your indicators. They’re called ‘indicators’ because they indicate your intention. They’re not called ‘do-ers’; I can see that you’re changing lanes and that token flashing light means nothing once you’ve already started changing lanes. Use the freaking things to indicate, not just to avoid a ticket. OK I’m off the soapbox now.

+1: “Indicate the intention, not the action.”

*Propping up luther_bendross’s soapbox*

+1 on all points you have made

While we’re talking about speeds, am I the only one here who has seen the changed speed limits on roadworks (particularly Parkes Way @ Russell and the Glenloch Interchange)? It frustrates the holy crap out of me when I sit on 88km/h in the 90km/h zone on Parkes Way, then slow down according to the changed speeds only to be overtaken by some moron still doing 90km/h. Then when I get into the 100km/h zone on Tuggers Parkway said moron is still doing 90km/h in the right hand lane while I’m trying to get near 100km/h without overtaking the moron on the left.

My general theme here through these convoluted sentences is:
1. Stick to the limit
2. Get in the freaking left hand lane if you’re not overtaking.

Actually while I’m here, that funny stick on your steering column is for your indicators. They’re called ‘indicators’ because they indicate your intention. They’re not called ‘do-ers’; I can see that you’re changing lanes and that token flashing light means nothing once you’ve already started changing lanes. Use the freaking things to indicate, not just to avoid a ticket. OK I’m off the soapbox now.

If you drive to slowly you CAN get booked for beeing a Hazard to traffic. Tho i guess some ppl have a good reason eg: Trucks, buses and Towing Vechiles. Personally old cars are ok i was once in that situation. Just bugs me when ppl pull out in front and then sit on 50km/hr in a 80km/h zone and its peek traffic, i just think “why did you cut me off to do that?”. I can see why ppl in canberra are agressive drivers. In QLD sunny coast ppl are so polite there. ^^ As for limit over id say it depends on the officer. 10% no way, 5% sounds a little more realistic.

astrojax said :

in nsw, the ranges are 0-15 over the limit, 15-30 over and more than 30kmh over the posted limit – so 20kmh is mid range. what a very stupid question, really. i won’t get more involved in expressing my thoughts on that part…

FYI, the ranges in NSW changed recently. For regular, full licence holders caught exceeding the speed limit outside of a school zone, the ranges are:

45, 6 points

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/rulesregulations/penalties/speeding.html

61. No Joke. The speed limit is the maximum speed you are legally allowed to travel. 1km/h per hour over that is against the law, and you are allowed to be booked at a police officers discretion.

Unreasonable? Depends on the road. Townshend street in Phillip has a ridiculous speed limit of 60km/h per hour. Personally, during most week days, I am not comfortable traveling at more than 40km/h per hour on this stretch. 60km/h is downright dangerous. Marcus Clarke Street in the city, 60km/h limit, I stick to 40-50km/h. On roads like this, I would argue that there would be regular situations where a driver should be stopped for traveling too fast for the conditions, when they were traveling at the speed limit.

Roads like the Northbound side of Melrose Drive on the other hand, a 60km/h speed limit where even the most attentive of drivers will find their speed creep to 65-70, is another story. 60km/h on this road is too low… yet it is patrolled by cameras.

Even though the law is “black and white”, enforcing it in such a manner, is often not fair. Particularly in regards to speed limits in the ACT, where the procedures and policies for setting speed limits appear to be far from black and white, with examples of inconsistent limits and signage able to be found all around the territory.

IMHO, best way to enforce safe vehicle speeds, is to build roads that encourage safe vehicle speeds. If a road does not appear to be safe to travel fast, the majority of the intelligent population will not travel fast, regardless of what the speed limit is.

I call bullsh*t.
Has VG (who presumably is a serving officer) booked someone for exceeding by 1km/h? Even if he says yes, I claim no.
Why?
Because if it were contested, then before a magistrate, he’d look a pillock.
So I call bullsh*t.
And if I’m wrong, then it says a lot about the sort of officer VG is.

ExFeds said :

VG “YES” – Does this include those caged vehicles?

You should know

sloppery said :

vg said :

sloppery said :

Load of bollocks – no cop will hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone. If I got one I’d take it to court and say “my speedo said 60, and here’s the tolerance the ADRs allow for a speedo”.

I think 10% or 10km/h, whichever is lower is the threshold at which you would realistically expect to be booked.

So you’re 100% sure that a cop will not hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone in any circumstances…….100% sure?

Thank you Commissioner.

If the ADR thing is such a great defence why doesn’t every ticket in Victoria issued for say, 63 in 60 zone, using the said cameras collapse in a legal heap?

Because the ADR’s application as a defence is a myth as well

Have you ever handed out a speeding ticket for 1km/h over the limit, or know anyone who has? If you were patrolling a 60km/h road, and the radar said ’61km/h’, would you genuinely pull the person over and hand out a ticket?

Just curious.

Yes

NeedHelp said :

vg – I am talking about the rules here in the ACT. I was informed that there is a rule of 10% in place, and this was confirmed by both the Traffic Camera Office and by Traffic Representations at the AFP.

Many people on this thread seem to be aware of this 10% rule, not just me.

Blingerific above provides the legislative evidence. Thanks.

NeedHelp, Could you ask your reliable contacts why a close friend of mine was fined for doing 85kmh in the 80kmh zone past the fixed speed camera southbound on the Monaro Hwy at Hume? He was actually in the right turn lane onto Isabella drive.

Everyone on RiotACT will say you are a baby killer and a menace to the world for going faster than the limit.
Like going into the young liberals meeting and asking them what they think of the labour party.
You pretty much know what the answer will be.

ExFeds said :

VG “YES” – Does this include those caged vehicles?

You’re having trouble grasping a concept hey? Yes. It is also a Police vehicle.

I am sure you will find that they can be fitted with a Ballinger Speedo. (Which means that if your going faster than them when they are doing the speed limit you will be breaking the law.)

You didn’t answer my question feds, you ex AFP?

I’ve never been fined for anything under 10%

8/10 times I drive to Sydney I pass the cops parked near Collector at 120-121 where its 110 zone (logged from GPS, not indicated dash speed) and never been pulled over

Deano
I’ve never yet driven a vehicle where the speedo didn’t overstate the vehicle’s speed by at least 5%. I suspect car manufacturers do it deliberately to avoid being liable for for anything happening due to excessive speed.

My Subaru always indicates low. Below 100kmh it is one or two kmh (78 when doin 80 indicated), above 100kmh it is about 8kmh. As measured using an accurate GPS device (no, a TomTom et al is not an accurate GPS device).

Annoyedcan
The 10% is not true. If your speedo is out its your fault. Its your car once you drive away. Alot of cars are below eg. so 80 on your speedo could be 78

Um no, at the time of sale it has, by law, to be accurate to within +/-10%. If you then go an change tyre sizes or do something else stupid then yes, you are on your own. I had a friend lose her license inside a week after buying a new car, the speedo was indicating well below the actual speed (i.e. she was doing 80 odd when indicating 60). She got the manufacturer to pay for all her court costs to get her license back.

vg
Bligerific provides his opinion, not law. If it was the law thousands of Victorian fines would be void.

The ADR I quoted is not opinion, it is a minimum standard, that is brought into law by federal legislation. But just because at the time of manufacture your car had a speedo that had an accuracy of +/-10% does not mean the Law views it the same. I have not actually found the laws anywhere and I really can’t be arsed looking.

So why does Victoria get away with fines for 1kmh over? Because their road laws are very different to ours, even if they claim to be under the same National Road Rules as we are.

It is one of the many failures of state based governments. And I get the sneaking feeling the amount of money Victoria is squeezing out of their drivers is making Stanhope just a little bit envious… (ad yes that paragraph is an opinion 🙂

VG “YES” – Does this include those caged vehicles?

annoyedcan said :

The 10% is not true. If your speedo is out its your fault. Its your car once you drive away. Alot of cars are below eg. so 80 on your speedo could be 78

I’ve never yet driven a vehicle where the speedo didn’t overstate the vehicle’s speed by at least 5%. I suspect car manufacturers do it deliberately to avoid being liable for for anything happening due to excessive speed.

vg said :

sloppery said :

Load of bollocks – no cop will hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone. If I got one I’d take it to court and say “my speedo said 60, and here’s the tolerance the ADRs allow for a speedo”.

I think 10% or 10km/h, whichever is lower is the threshold at which you would realistically expect to be booked.

So you’re 100% sure that a cop will not hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone in any circumstances…….100% sure?

Thank you Commissioner.

If the ADR thing is such a great defence why doesn’t every ticket in Victoria issued for say, 63 in 60 zone, using the said cameras collapse in a legal heap?

Because the ADR’s application as a defence is a myth as well

Have you ever handed out a speeding ticket for 1km/h over the limit, or know anyone who has? If you were patrolling a 60km/h road, and the radar said ’61km/h’, would you genuinely pull the person over and hand out a ticket?

Just curious.

Yes

With all the percentages and mention of accuracy, are all the speedometers in ACT Police vehicles that are used for speed detection calibrated and certified?

The 10% is not true. If your speedo is out its your fault. Its your car once you drive away. Alot of cars are below eg. so 80 on your speedo could be 78

NeedHelp said :

vg – I am talking about the rules here in the ACT. I was informed that there is a rule of 10% in place, and this was confirmed by both the Traffic Camera Office and by Traffic Representations at the AFP.

Many people on this thread seem to be aware of this 10% rule, not just me.

Blingerific above provides the legislative evidence. Thanks.

Bligerific provides his opinion, not law. If it was the law thousands of Victorian fines would be void.

By the way, how many tickets have you handed out?

I got a white van fine for 64 in a 60 zone. Only odd thing about it was that I’d seen the van, and thought I was safe because I was UNDER the limit that I thought was 70. When I went back and checked, it was 60. Ho-hum…copped it sweet, and IIRC it was about $91.

It’s very dependant on a lot of factors, with the biggest being the attitude test.

vg said :

The 10% thing is a myth.

Tickets are regularly issued in Melbourne for camera offences of 62 or 63 in a 60 zone.

‘They’ didn’t make anything

True, but Victoria is well known for having draconian traffic laws.

There are no speedo’s which are truly calibrated. I know that mine is out by 3km/h, and I know that NSW coppers have a big warning sign underneath their speedo stating that it’s not calibrated, thus there is usually an allowance for that. Which is why technically 61km/h is breaking the law in a 60km/h zone, but they will not usually fine you for it.

You also have to remember that things such as warm or cold tyres, and tyre presures can affect how much your speedo is out by.

vg – I am talking about the rules here in the ACT. I was informed that there is a rule of 10% in place, and this was confirmed by both the Traffic Camera Office and by Traffic Representations at the AFP.

Many people on this thread seem to be aware of this 10% rule, not just me.

Blingerific above provides the legislative evidence. Thanks.

If I was travelling along in a 60 zone and was told I was getting a ticket for doing 10 over, I would not be happy….I think its unreasonable considering most reasonable people at some stage will unintentionally exceed the limit.

well, if you can’t drive within the speed limits, hand back your licence, exfeds…

sloppery said :

Load of bollocks – no cop will hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone. If I got one I’d take it to court and say “my speedo said 60, and here’s the tolerance the ADRs allow for a speedo”.

I think 10% or 10km/h, whichever is lower is the threshold at which you would realistically expect to be booked.

So you’re 100% sure that a cop will not hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone in any circumstances…….100% sure?

Thank you Commissioner.

If the ADR thing is such a great defence why doesn’t every ticket in Victoria issued for say, 63 in 60 zone, using the said cameras collapse in a legal heap?

Because the ADR’s application as a defence is a myth as well

It seems that you are very concerned about to what extent you can break the law before you are penalised.

I suspect that speed limits are not put in place to spoil your fun, or to place a stranglehold on your superior driving ability, but rather to protect all other road users from the likes of you.

I am amazed by your last sentence in post #12. What is it exactly about a speed limit sign that is ‘unknown’? Is it the number itself, or the sheer audacity of the government and police to not inform you of exactly how fast above said number you can travel before they book your a$$?

I am mentally filing this post in my ‘Most Disturbing and Ridiculous Things Ever Read on RA” along with my personal favourite, a comment made in a discussion about speed limits in school zones (words to the effect of) “You should only have to drive 40 if you can actually see children”.

Don’t break the law and you won’t COP anything.

ExFeds said :

BUZZ: I spoke to some ACT Police officers recently about quotas, whether their vehicle were speed certified and what is their tolerance for speed over the limits.

Just wanting to get an idea on the public perception thingy!

If I was travelling along in a 60 zone and was told I was getting a ticket for doing 10 over, I would not be happy….I think its unreasonable considering most reasonable people at some stage will unintentionally exceed the limit.

Cameras…..well, what can I say…they are really good at detecting a speeding vehicle but that don’t prevent anything…especially if the speeder crashed immediately after the detection….NO DEAL!

Its amazing what is unknown to us but we all just COP it without question!

So going 70 in a 60 zone is acceptable to you because you can’t work out how to drive at 60?

You spoke to the Police, what were their answers?

If Needhelp believes the 10% rule he might be risking a ticket. I’ve had friends receive a notice from the speed vans for 87 in an 80 zone. I suspect it is over 86.

As for the cops using those guns, generally they will allow a bit of judgement. If you’re detected over the limit by say 10km/hr but slowing down, chances are you’ll get off, unless you’re in something stupid like a lowered WRX. In sparse traffic on a dual lane road, driving a family car, no P plates, 114 in a 100 zone might be ignored, if the cop thinks there’s a likelihood of someone doing 120 soon enough.

As for 20 over the limit, that figure smells like a bit of a troll, or else the OP is totally out of it.

BUZZ: I spoke to some ACT Police officers recently about quotas, whether their vehicle were speed certified and what is their tolerance for speed over the limits.

Just wanting to get an idea on the public perception thingy!

If I was travelling along in a 60 zone and was told I was getting a ticket for doing 10 over, I would not be happy….I think its unreasonable considering most reasonable people at some stage will unintentionally exceed the limit.

Cameras…..well, what can I say…they are really good at detecting a speeding vehicle but that don’t prevent anything…especially if the speeder crashed immediately after the detection….NO DEAL!

Its amazing what is unknown to us but we all just COP it without question!

NickD said :

I can’t help but get the impression that this is a bit of a loaded question…

BANG !!

The law says 61, Ive been booked southbound through that camera on Northbound Ave and London cct doing 64.
Some of the posters dont know what they are talking about +10% in an urban myth.
Basicaly it depends on how acurate the equiptments they are using are.

Load of bollocks – no cop will hand out a ticket for 61 in a 60 zone. If I got one I’d take it to court and say “my speedo said 60, and here’s the tolerance the ADRs allow for a speedo”.

I think 10% or 10km/h, whichever is lower is the threshold at which you would realistically expect to be booked.

Well, under ADR 18/00 subrule 18.5.1.1.2. (SPEEDOMETERS AND ODOMETERS (ALL VEHICLES)) indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40 km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 percent See http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/all/search/969EAB75362C71EBCA257242007F4BC9

Ergo, in a 60 zone you should not reasonably be fined for 54-66kmh. This is the current argument with the Victorian systems booking people for speeds as little as 1kmh over the designated speed, as even if your vehicle meets the ADR you can’t reasonably be expected to accurately monitor a 1kmh deviation. Radar and other speed measuring devices have to be calibrated on a regular basis, the same can’t be said for speedometers…

There is also the fact that tyre wear can account for up to an extra 3% error alone, not to mention what happens when you start changing tyre sizes and don’t get your speedo recalibrated.

But, as with all laws the officer enforcing them has a reasonable amount of interpretation they can apply.

in nsw, the ranges are 0-15 over the limit, 15-30 over and more than 30kmh over the posted limit – so 20kmh is mid range. what a very stupid question, really. i won’t get more involved in expressing my thoughts on that part…

i also find bd84 (#3)’s comment a bit odd – why is 40 in a 60 zone ‘too slow’ – too slow for who?

remember, the posted limit is the fastest (upper limit) speed permitted in good weather conditions. 40 in a 60 zone could, in some circumstances, be excessive speed. i really don’t get the ‘too slow’ argument. now, ‘obstructing traffic’ i understand, but simply travelling at a smooth safe speed isn’t doing that – it is only slowing you down when you somehow have an urge to demand other road users have to go as fast as the limit allows. if everyone slowed down and travelled below the limit, everyone would arrive a few moments later – so? – and everyone would be safer. what should the choice be, then?

Under Australian design rules, your speedo only needed to be accurate to +-10%.

So any more than 10% over should potentially be finable.

However, I’d like to see it safety based, not a fixed speed camera on the bottom of a 2km long hill (ala Parkway, just after Cotter Road)

The general consensus is if someone is caught doing 5k’s over the posted speed limit, then they are given a ticket. So if a camera/cop snap you at 105k’s you will be let off,however if you are caught doing 106k’s you will be fined for doing 6k’s over the limit.

This has been proven as I’ve gone past a fixed speed camera at around 105k’s & I have did not receive an infringement notice. However I know of a few people who have been nabbed by the Police for doing 6k’s over the limit & they were annoyed once I told them about the leniency.

That 5k’s leniency is to take tyre depth into account.

NeedHelp said :

10% above the limit is acceptable. So then, 66 in a 60 is ok, but 67 will get you a ticket, and 88 in an 80 is ok, but 89 will get you a ticket, and 110 in a 100 is ok, but 111 will get you a ticket. This is the rule for stand-alone stationery cameras – I am not sure if it’s the same for police officers with radar guns, or those dudes in the vans. It is hidden deep in the murky depths of their policies, never to be revealed to the public for obvious reasons. They made it 10% a few years back, because they needed a tolerance level once these cameras were introduced (calibration faults etc).

Yes, 20 km over will/should get you a ticket.

The 10% thing is a myth.

Tickets are regularly issued in Melbourne for camera offences of 62 or 63 in a 60 zone.

‘They’ didn’t make anything

I can’t help but get the impression that this is a bit of a loaded question…

10km

Depends.

If you failed the “attitude test”, 61.

(Seriously, anything more than about 65 is probably at risk. 20 over is well over – cop it sweet).

1. 20 km/h over : I hope so, imagine doing 60km/h in a school zone?? ah hello, children people!

2. 65 km/h, but im sure there is some law specifying what the minimum is

Wow you really are on the whole Traffic Infringement Notice campaign. Open up to us Feds, tell us why this issue has you in a flap.

In a sixty kilometer an hour zone, I reckon you could be caught speeding by anything from 4km/h and up.

For 20km/h over I’d expect a ticket from the boys in blue…

I believe the generally-prescribed-to-by-drivers rule is 10% over the speed limit. Not sure whether the police work on this basis, however.

10% above the limit is acceptable. So then, 66 in a 60 is ok, but 67 will get you a ticket, and 88 in an 80 is ok, but 89 will get you a ticket, and 110 in a 100 is ok, but 111 will get you a ticket. This is the rule for stand-alone stationery cameras – I am not sure if it’s the same for police officers with radar guns, or those dudes in the vans. It is hidden deep in the murky depths of their policies, never to be revealed to the public for obvious reasons. They made it 10% a few years back, because they needed a tolerance level once these cameras were introduced (calibration faults etc).

Yes, 20 km over will/should get you a ticket.

“In a prescribed 60Km/h zone, what is the lowest speed you would expect the Police to hand out a ticket?”

Uhh, considering that it’s illegal to exceed the speed limit, 61km/h.

Although I understand that they have some sort of tolerance, so more realistically probably something like 63 or 64.

Why would it not be reasonable to get a ticket for doing 20kph over the speed limit? Stupid question. You do the crime, you cop the fine.

Lowest speed? well if you were doing 40kph or less in a 60 zone, in normal conditions, I would expect the police to fine you for driving unnecessarily slow. If you meant at what speed above 60kph should police start issuing a fine, legally 61kph, reasonably about 65kph, taking into account accuracy of speedos and there is very little difference on a regular speedo between the 2 marks.

I think speed cameras should be introduced into Canberra in line with the rest of Australia (in particular Perth)…. there are too many speeding on my local streets (even as the rain sets in they insist on doing 90km/hr in a 50 zone) – fine them, fine away and put the money to the local suburb for community things – bring it on. Speeders need bigger fines.
🙂 there I said it.

61