Western Australian Road Laws & Regulations

Contents Menu:

• Western Australian Road Laws & Procedures
• Warning Oncoming Traffic is Fine by the Police Minister
• WA's Hoon Legislation Discussion Road Traffic Amendment (Impounding And Confiscation Of Vehicles) Act 2004
  
• Why check your vehicle speed camera photograph?
• List of WA Traffic Controls with Red Light Cameras (DOC Forma

Western Australian Road Laws & Procedure

I refer to recent statements from the Police Service that Multanova locations, to record speeding drivers, are no longer being hidden from general view, and that the Police Service has a policy of advertising their locations to the public and ask will the Minister advise -

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

The Western Australia Police Service advise as follows:

• (a) No

  Question : (b) if not, what offence would a driver apprehended for doing so be charged with;

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (b) It is an offence against Part II Section 20 of the Police Act 1892 to hinder police in their duties. It is also an offence against Regulation 185 of the Road Traffic Code 2000 to use headlights on high beam within 200 metres behind a vehicle or an oncoming vehicle. The Police Service advise that in the case of speed camera operations, unless motorists’ safety is at risk, they do not prosecute as the safety message of slowing down motorists is the ultimate

  Question : (c) is a member of the public entitled to warn oncoming traffic that there is a Multanova ahead by any means, such as a sign;

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (c) No

  Question : (d) if not, what offence would the member of the public apprehended for doing so be charged with;

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (d) A member of the public could be charged with an offence against Regulation 297 of the Road Traffic Code 2000, erection of unauthorised signs. The Police Service advises that they do not prosecute in these instances unless a specific complaint is received.

  Question : (e) is it illegal for a member of the public to block a footpath with their vehicle;

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (e) Yes

  Question : (f) if this is so, why are police vehicles blocking the footpath in the course of their duties and obstructing pedestrians;

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (f) The operators of camera vehicles have been instructed to abide by all parking requirements and this is being complied with. Police vehicles, however, when used in the performance of official duties, are exempt from the regulations by virtue of regulation 280 of the Road Traffic Code 2000.

  Question : (g) are the locations for Multanova placement decided on by a predication of the minimum number of vehicles that travel along the road per day; and

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (g) No

  Question : (h) what percentage of Multanovas are placed on country roads as opposed to roads in metropolitan Perth?

Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied:

• (h) A minimum of 15% of speed cameras are continuously in use in country areas. In the case of breakdowns, these are replaced immediately by use of metropolitan cameras. The 15% increases during the year as speed camera operations from the city are, at times, sent to country locations.

WA's Hoon Legislation

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE NEW LEGISLATION.

Road Traffic Amendment (Impounding And Confiscation Of Vehicles) Act 2004

WA's HOON LEGISLATION

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE NEW LEGISLATION.

Road Traffic Amendment (Impounding And Confiscation Of Vehicles) Act 2004

What offence have I been charged with?
A Police Officer has witnessed you committing a driving offence (i.e. one or more of the following):
Racing with another vehicle;

Attempting to establish or break a speed record/s;

Speed, acceleration, braking or steering capability is being tested or contested in any way; Skill of driver is being tested or contested;

In a manner that causes smoke to come from one or more of the vehicle’s tyres or a substance on the road; and/or In a manner that causes the driving wheels to lose traction.

What’s going to happen to my vehicle?

Police have the authority to have your vehicle towed away and kept from you for 48 hours. Importantly, you, the driver, are up for all towage and storage costs if you are convicted/found guilty.

Are there any exceptions to the 48 hour impoundment?

Yes.

If a member of the police force is satisfied that the impounded vehicle was stolen or hired, the car will be released.

A senior police officer may authorise early release if there is a case for exceptional hardship if the vehicle remains impounded.

What happens if towing facilities aren’t easy to get?

At their discretion, Police may elect to drive the impounded vehicle to the police station themselves OR if the driver is licensed and not under any impairment (e.g. excess alcohol), police may allow the driver to drive the vehicle to the station.

Can the Police seize my keys?

Police may seize keys to the vehicle that has been impounded.

Police may, without warrant, enter any premises to seize keys to any vehicle that is subject to a court order.

What if it’s not my vehicle?

The owner of the vehicle will be notified by Police.

The driver is responsible for the towage, storage and other relevant costs incurred in impounding the vehicle if found convicted of the offence.

If the car has not been collected by the time the impoundment period expires (48 hours), the owner is responsible for post-impoundment fees.

How do I get the vehicle back?

To obtain a letter authorising the release of the vehicle from the police station (see the Impoundment Notice for which station), you must produce a vehicle license/registration in the name of the owner and photographic identity support (e.g. drivers’ license with a photo, passport) and pay any costs.

Can it get worse than 48 hours impoundment?

Yes.

If you are convicted of a second impounding offence within three years of the first, the court may impound the vehicle for up to 3 months. In addition, the person convicted of the offence may have their driver’s license suspended and is responsible for all costs associated with the extended impound period. The Commissioner may refuse to release the vehicle until all such costs are paid.

If you’ve been convicted of two or more impounding offences within the last five years, a court may order that the vehicle is confiscated. A confiscated vehicle becomes the property of the state. You may also have your driver’s license cancelled.

This does not apply if the vehicle has been stolen or hired.

If the court is satisfied that the vehicle was lent at the time of the offence, the court instead of confiscating the vehicle, may order it impounded for up to six months.

Do I get a warning that the vehicle may be confiscated or impounded for longer, depending on the court’s decision?

Yes.

14 days prior to the court hearing, the Police Commissioner is required to provide written notice of the police intention to seek impoundment or confiscation of the vehicle. This notice goes to:

The driver of the vehicle

The vehicle’s license holder

The Director General (DPI)

Any other person whom the Commissioner is aware of who has or may have interest in the vehicle

The public generally, in a newspaper having state-wide circulation

Speeding Offences

People caught travelling at 45km/h or more above the legal limit also risk being charged with reckless driving under the new provisions and having their drivers’ licence suspended or even cancelled.

Speed Camera Laws & You

"If you aren't aware of the law you may well pay a speeding fine when you weren't actually speeding."

Multanova camera setup on a dual lane carriage way.

( UPDATE: 11th March 2004 - The Police Prosecution Section has decided to appeal the Magistrates decision regarding this case. They appear to be rather concerned about the precedent that it has set. - They think Multanova speed cameras can differentiate two vehicles in close proximity - Who are they trying to kid?)

Don't give in John we're all behind you 100%

Wrongful Prosecutions?

John wrote to PoliceSpeedCameras for some assistance in January 2004.

I received an email from a gentleman (lets call him John for the story - real name with-held) who had received a speeding ticket and wanted to fight the infringement.

He believed that he wasn't speeding at the time he was snapped by a Multanova speed camera. At the time the photo was taken, there was another vehicle coming up on the inside lane.

I recommended that John take a look at the Multanova photograph at the old traffic office on Wellington Street, to see if there were two vehicles in the photo or just his car by itself.

If there were two vehicles in the photo his concerns were quite valid. You see the microwave emissions from a speed measuring device are not able to differentiate one vehicle from another when they are close together in adjacent lanes. Sure enough there were two vehicles in the frame.

Anyway, John was pretty steamed-up and with some encouragement, he took the matter to court representing himself.

During the case the Multanova photograph was produced and John pointed out to the magistrate that there were two vehicles in the photograph. The magistrate asked for a look at the photograph and commented to the prosecuting sergeant, "I thought that the police do not charge drivers if there are two vehicles in the photograph?" The sergeant replied, saying that he believed that the magistrate was right, and the case was adjourned.

Well John and I expected the police to withdraw the speeding charge, but that was not to be.

By this time John was feeling pretty down so I suggested that he not proceed any further by himself. I suggested that he go and see a very good solicitor that I know and tell him the story.

On the next court date John and the solicitor spoke to the prosecuting sergeant and offered not to pursue court costs if the flawed charge was withdrawn before court. dismissed. The police prosecuting section for some silly reason took a hard line and refused to drop the case.

Well, to cut a long story short, the police lost the case and the solicitors costs and Johns costs were awarded against the police. Ouch!@#! I'll bet that hurt them.

(As things have turned out, I couldn't have been more right!)

So the moral of the story is "Go and look at your photograph" and if there are two vehicle in the frame fight it!!!!! The police obviously didn't want to set a test case, but that is indeed what happened.

SupportCrew

Foot Note:

If or when you go to view your Multanova photograph at the police camera section on the corner of Wellington and Plain streets, they will ask you to fill in a form.

The form includes a question. "Why do you want to see the photograph?" This sounds pretty stupid, except when you realise that they are just trying to get evidence to use against you

in court.

A standard reply - "Because I would like to view the photograph." This is all you need to say. There is no obligation for you to give any other reason than you are there to view the photograph.

If you need a "sledge hammer" of a solicitor, who charges honestly, send me an email. He talks quietly - but carries A BIG STICK!!