RTA police cars?? - Page 3

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 07:48 PM

It's a pity these human rights lawyers who fight for the rights of boat people don't put more effort in to fighting for the rights of Australian citizens in the high court.

Then again, the apathy of the nation has produced this. More interested in keeping pokies alive in poor suburbs and beer in our hands than tackling anything truly worthwhile.

What a mediocre bunch we have become.

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

As someone who has spent the last 37 years being chased by most things with disco lights on the roof I think I can safely state that the NSW RTA CAN book car drivers for roadworthy type defects.

No, you wont see them enforcing speed limits or seat belt type offences, but if you have an unroadworthy car they can legally book you.
Most Inspectors wont because they cant be bothered, it's easier (and more lucrative) to book a Truck with a clearance light not working.

(I must be getting old, I'm agreeing with Mad Max's mate

!!)

See here's the thing. I'm not convinced (though happy to be shown the light) how an unroadworthy vehicle travelling on a public road but not breaking any road rules, can be fined. It's not illegal under the road rules to be unroadworthy, it is illegal to break the road rules.

That's why, as I understand it, canaries get you off the road but don't have an associated fine (you haven't broken any road rules).

Please correct me if I am wrong with fact not opinon.

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati888

See here's the thing. I'm not convinced (though happy to be shown the light) how an unroadworthy vehicle travelling on a public road but not breaking any road rules, can be fined. It's not illegal under the road rules to be unroadworthy, it is illegal to break the road rules.

That's why, as I understand it, canaries get you off the road but don't have an associated fine (you haven't broken any road rules).

Please correct me if I am wrong with fact not opinon.

You are wrong.. There i said it. Its illegal to opperate an unroadworthy vehicle on the road.

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMGC63

You are wrong.. There i said it. Its illegal to opperate an unroadworthy vehicle on the road.

Yeah, but I asked in the nicest possible way for proof, did I not?

SEZ213 · 07-09-2011, 08:01 PM

When you drive an 'unroadworthy vehicle' on a 'public road', you're breaking the law - RTA

Quote:

The Road Safety (Traffic) Regulations, 1988, states a person must not drive a vehicle that is not in a safe condition; this is why you've been given a canary. If your car is unsafe, then you are not only endangering your own life, but that of your passengers and other road users.

This is probably pertinent as well...

Quote:

Keep in mind the implications if you do drive your vehicle after this time. For a start, disregarding a notice of unroadworthiness is worth three demerit points against your licence, and you could also be fined up to $1000.

http://www.vacc.com.au/ConsumerInfo/...1/Default.aspx

That's Victoria, RTA road users handbook has similar...

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 08:07 PM

There's no reference to a vehicle needing to be roadworthy in the Vic road rules.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/v...09289/s15.html

I'm aware of the obvious danger of unroadworthiness, but where do you draw a line? I believe anyone with two or more brake lights out should be taken off the road (and I see at least 5 per day), but it's maybe not as dangerous as bald tyres.

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati888

There's no reference to a vehicle needing to be roadworthy in the Vic road rules.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/v...09289/s15.html

I'm aware of the obvious danger of unroadworthiness, but where do you draw a line? I believe anyone with two or more brake lights out should be taken off the road (and I see at least 5 per day), but it's maybe not as dangerous as bald tyres.

Are you really serious????

Trevor 57 · 07-09-2011, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati888

Yeah, but I asked in the nicest possible way for proof, did I not?

From the Victorian Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations:
259 Other use of vehicle offences
(1) A person must not use, or cause or permit to be used, on a highway a vehicle or a combination of vehicles that is not in a safe and roadworthy condition.

You just have to know where to look.

Trevor 57 · 07-09-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati888

There's no reference to a vehicle needing to be roadworthy in the Vic road rules.

You are looking in the wrong place, the Road Rules deal with driving and road law, you need to look elswhere for other relevant regulations.

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMGC63

Are you really serious????

What do you mean? About the level of danger in unroadworthiness, the brake lights or the reference to the road rules?

SEZ213 · 07-09-2011, 08:21 PM

Mr. Policeman can book you for being unroadworthy, as can the transport authority.

As a provision of you obtaining registration, your vehicle needs to be in a roadworthy condition - if it's not, they will not register your vehicle until it is in a roadworthy condition. It's also (if I remember correctly) that this vehicle needs to remain in a roadworthy condition. If it does not remain in a roadworthy condition - Mr. Policeman or the Transport authority can and will book you...

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducati888

What do you mean? About the level of danger in unroadworthiness, the brake lights or the reference to the road rules?

That you dont believe its an offence to opperate an unroadworthy vehicle...

Ducati888 · 07-09-2011, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Trev

From the Victorian Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations:
259 Other use of vehicle offences
(1) A person must not use, or cause or permit to be used, on a highway a vehicle or a combination of vehicles that is not in a safe and roadworthy condition.

You just have to know where to look.

Thanks Big trev. I'm convinced.

Very interesting reading. Cheers.

Trevor 57 · 07-09-2011, 08:31 PM

I hope you are ready for this:

From the Victorian Road Safety Act
13 Power to inspect motor vehicles and trailers
(1) An authorised officer for the purposes of this section or a member of the police force may at any reasonable time inspect a motor vehicle or trailer which is being used on a highway if the officer or member believes on reasonable grounds that—
(a) the driver of the motor vehicle is not complying with this Act or the regulations in driving a motor vehicle of that kind; or
(b) the motor vehicle or trailer does not comply with this Act or the regulations.
(2) An authorised officer for the purposes of this section or a member of the police force may, by notice in accordance with subsection (3), require to be produced for inspection at a place specified in the notice, a motor vehicle or trailer which the officer or member has reasonable grounds for suspecting has within the preceding 30 days been used or will be used on a highway if the officer or member believes on reasonable grounds that—
(a) the driver of the motor vehicle has not complied with this Act or the regulations in driving a motor vehicle of that kind; or
(b) the motor vehicle or trailer does not comply with this Act or the regulations.
(3) A notice must be in writing and must be served on the registered operator or, if the motor vehicle or trailer is not registered, on the owner.
(4) An inspection may include any tests which the inspecting officer or member of the police force decides to be appropriate.
(5) A person who refuses or fails—
(a) to allow a motor vehicle or trailer to be inspected when required under this section;
or
(b) to produce a motor vehicle or trailer for inspection at the place specified in a notice within 7 days after service of the notice on that person—
is guilty of an offence.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.

(6) In this section authorised officer for the purposes of this section means—
(a) an officer of the Corporation authorised in writing by the Corporation for the purposes of this section; or
(ab) a person employed under Part 3 of the Public Administration Act 2004 in the police force of Victoria who is authorised in writing by the Chief Commissioner of Police for the purposes of this section; or
(b) an employee in the Department of Infrastructure authorised in writing by the Secretary to the Department of Infrastructure for the purposes of this section

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 08:37 PM

GAME, SET and MATCH.

CraftyXr6 · 07-09-2011, 09:26 PM

I work for queensland police as a mechanic. i havent heard of the roadies pulling people over without an organised road side set up with police.

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 09:40 PM

So what happens if I neglect one of these things as it's trying to pull me over???

What a joke according to them almost every car on the road would be unroadworthy. I don't think manufacturing could keep up with all the "mandatory" windscreen repalcements lol.

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

So what happens if I neglect one of these things as it's trying to pull me over???

.

Id imagine they'd record your details, then get on the radio and call in the Police for assistance and you'd be charged with failing to follow the direction of an authorised officer!

CraftyXr6 · 07-09-2011, 09:48 PM

try it and let us know

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Trev

I hope you are ready for this:

From the Victorian Road Safety Act
13 Power to inspect motor vehicles and trailers
(1) An authorised officer for the purposes of this section or a member of the police force may at any reasonable time inspect a motor vehicle or trailer which is being used on a highway if the officer or member believes on reasonable grounds that—
(a) the driver of the motor vehicle is not complying with this Act or the regulations in driving a motor vehicle of that kind; or
(b) the motor vehicle or trailer does not comply with this Act or the regulations.
(2) An authorised officer for the purposes of this section or a member of the police force may, by notice in accordance with subsection (3), require to be produced for inspection at a place specified in the notice, a motor vehicle or trailer which the officer or member has reasonable grounds for suspecting has within the preceding 30 days been used or will be used on a highway if the officer or member believes on reasonable grounds that—
(a) the driver of the motor vehicle has not complied with this Act or the regulations in driving a motor vehicle of that kind; or
(b) the motor vehicle or trailer does not comply with this Act or the regulations.
(3) A notice must be in writing and must be served on the registered operator or, if the motor vehicle or trailer is not registered, on the owner.
(4) An inspection may include any tests which the inspecting officer or member of the police force decides to be appropriate.
(5) A person who refuses or fails—
(a) to allow a motor vehicle or trailer to be inspected when required under this section;
or
(b) to produce a motor vehicle or trailer for inspection at the place specified in a notice within 7 days after service of the notice on that person—
is guilty of an offence.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.

(6) In this section authorised officer for the purposes of this section means—
(a) an officer of the Corporation authorised in writing by the Corporation for the purposes of this section; or
(ab) a person employed under Part 3 of the Public Administration Act 2004 in the police force of Victoria who is authorised in writing by the Chief Commissioner of Police for the purposes of this section; or
(b) an employee in the Department of Infrastructure authorised in writing by the Secretary to the Department of Infrastructure for the purposes of this section

Not sure if I'm reading this right but basically if I refuse to have my car inspected on the spot I can take my car to vicroads to be inspected within 7 days?? If so game set and match FOR THEM.

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraftyXr6

try it and let us know

Ok I will, I'll get back to you in twenty years as there's a chance it may have actually happened by then.

Jim Goose · 07-09-2011, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

Not sure if I'm reading this right but basically if I refuse to have my car inspected on the spot I can take my car to vicroads to be inspected within 7 days?? If so game set and match FOR THEM.

Yes you are reading it wrong....

If you refuse to pull over... its an offence.
If you dont show your car when requested within 7days... its an offence.

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMGC63

Id imagine they'd record your details, then get on the radio and call in the Police for assistance and you'd be charged with failing to follow the direction of an authorised officer!

Sounds about right, can't help but think there's a degree of negligence here. We aren't raised to be aware of such an authority hardly anyone would know wtf is going on. Is it even obvious in the license test?? I was always aware of them however don't actualyl remember reading it in the book. Sure I read about cops and giving way to ambo's but I don't remember this mentioned in the same section.

Either way still far better off doing that than having to get a RWC believe me!!

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

Yes you are reading it wrong....

If you refuse to pull over... its an offence.
If you dont show your car when requested within 7days... its an offence.

You read my post wrong too

.

I said WITHIN 7 days. So what happens then?

Hypothetically I pull over, officer requests to inspect my car and I politely refuse. What happens? Does he then give me the option to bring the car to them within 7 days?

AMGC63 · 07-09-2011, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

You read my post wrong too

.

I said WITHIN 7 days. So what happens then?

You cant refuse an on the spot inspection, but you must present your car within 7 days for a full inspection if directed to.

FTRXR8 · 07-09-2011, 09:58 PM

Transport SA generally focus only on Taxis, Buses and Trucks, I usually see them in the mirror of my party bus on a Saturday night, but hey if your doing the right thing ( which I am sure most members are) then they are generally ok to deal with, just don't give them any lip . . . .

Jim Goose · 07-09-2011, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

Sounds about right, can't help but think there's a degree of negligence here. We aren't raised to be aware of such an authority hardly anyone would know wtf is going on. Is it even obvious in the license test?? I was always aware of them however don't actualyl remember reading it in the book. Sure I read about cops and giving way to ambo's but I don't remember this mentioned in the same section.

Either way still far better off doing that than having to get a RWC believe me!!

And either way.. ignorance of the law isnt an excuse.

Every single piece of legislation out there has a regulatory body which usually has a dept of authorised officers who make sure everything is complied to.

There are Tax laws out there... and tax officers carry out the regulation/ compliance.

Immigration laws.... immigrations officers...

Quaratine Laws.... Quarantine officers....

Fishing laws.... Fisheries officers...

Road and Transport laws.... RTA officers...

Customs laws... Customs Officers

Are we seeing the trend?

blownv8au · 07-09-2011, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

And either way.. ignorance of the law isnt an excuse.

Every single piece of legislation out there has a regulatory body which usually has a dept of authorised officers who make sure everything is complied to.

There are Tax laws out there... and tax officers carry out the regulation/ compliance.

Immigration laws.... immigrations officers...

Quaratine Laws.... Quarantine officers....

Fishing laws.... Fisheries officers...

Road and Transport laws.... RTA officers...

Customs laws... Customs Officers

Are we seeing the trend?

I bet each of these officers doesn't know all of the laws relating to their section but we as a citizen should as ignorance is no excuse. Are you kidding me, i know what your saying but with alot of these laws you don't know you've broken them till your in the crap.
I've never been made aware that the rta could pull you over while driving but i had them pull me over recently no issue. But i was unaware they could and its an offence not to.

ray38l · 07-09-2011, 11:08 PM

I was told back in about 2002 that the rta could pull people over. I was told by a cop that had pulled me over and noticed a lot of defects( i was young and poor then). He told me to get my car home asap because the rta guys were out and that i didn't want them pulling me over. He didn't seem to like them.
Even though i know they have the right to do it i still wouldn't stop. Honestly how many people would know what information to look for on an rta identification card? I wouldn't be able to tell a fake from the real deal. It could be anyone pulling me over.

ILLaViTaR · 07-09-2011, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blownv8au

I bet each of these officers doesn't know all of the laws relating to their section but we as a citizen should as ignorance is no excuse. Are you kidding me, i know what your saying but with alot of these laws you don't know you've broken them till your in the crap.
I've never been made aware that the rta could pull you over while driving but i had them pull me over recently no issue. But i was unaware they could and its an offence not to.

Kind've my point too actually. Personally I'll ignore many laws as many are illogical/unrealistic and only there for revenue purposes. Many on this site seem to get excited whenever the law is here to spite someone, love adding insult after injury whenever someone complains about a speeding fine or whatnot. They love their law, live their life by an unrealistic perception of right and wrong that is actually quite far off right and wrong. The law uses ignorance itself to convict victims, so why not the other way round??

And I have beaten the law with ignorance quite a few times just as many others have, not to mention officers themselves are ignorant and NEVER go buy the book, they'll never defect EVERY car the pull over that is unroadworthy, only the younger drivers, the smart **** drivers, the ones who annoy them or are unfortunate to come across them on a bad day. This is why the law is crap, if it was actually put into full practice the whole country would be having a riot. If every law was actually implemented you'd see how pathetic the precious legal system is. Everyone would be broke as only 0.1% of laws actually go through and instead one in every 1000 gets hit hard. That's how your precious legal system works!!! Laws that weren't even around 30yrs ago that are today. I wonder how many things people did back then that they can't now??? Must mean they're all injust criminals, seeing as the law is right and wrong and right and wrong can't change.

Thing that bugs me is I see a lot of people on here give up when the law is against them, I also see people asking on how to beat the law, challenge an unfair ticket or something. Then some/many clown/s comes in and says YOU DO THAT AND YOU'LL GO TO JAIL, LAW IS ABSOLUTE, SERVES YOU RIGHT, YOU GOT WHAT YOU DESERVED (despite the ticket being unfair in the first place...FACEPALM). They bring karma into it which turns it into a moral issue not an issue of legality. The law is not moral whatsoever, WAKE UP TO THE REAL WORLD PLEASE AND GET OUT OF YOUR PADDOCK.

I've seen the same members on this forum moan about how unfair the law is only for them to tell others "you deserve what you get, slow down next time".

This is one thing in this community I fail to understand so maybe someone can tell me why:

Why does everyone defend the law so so so so strongly? Where does all the spite come from??