Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Speeding fines

Sir,—This legislation makes no allowance for the conditions at the time of an offence. Obviously, 40 m.p.h. along Blenheim Road at 4 a.m. is not comparable to 40 m.p.h. up Colombo Street at 5 p.m. on Friday night But for the former offence, where no other contributing factors existed and the driver had no previous record, a magistrate would usually consider a fine of $7 or $8 a sufficient pen-

alty. Now the fine has quadrupled, with no taking into account of circumstances. I learned in a recent conversation with a Transport Department officer that if a motorist decides to appear in court and plead his case in the hope of getting a reduced fine he will lose double the number of demerit points that he would have lost had he “paid up and shut up." This is no more or less than official blackmail to persuade the motorist to forgo his right to defend himself in court.—Yours; etc., CONCERNED MOTOR-CYCLIST. July 2, 1971.

[Mr J. F. Thomas (regional director for the Ministry of Transport) replies: “A motorist receiving a speeding infringement notice is entitled to the same consideration which he would have experienced under the previous system when receiving a traffic offence notice. He is able to make a written or verbal explanation to the chief traffic officer who may, after considering all the circumstances, waive the infringement notice. Should the

chief traffic officer decide the notice would not be waived, then toe driver can have toe matter dealt with by a court by declining to pay the fee. Without restricting any other defence that the driver

may consider he has, he is entitled to defend toe matter on the grounds that he did not commit the alleged speeding infringement or that, for special reasons relating either to the speeding infringement or failure to pay toe fee or to himself, the amount of toe fee. is excessive. The court may, if it thinks fit, for special reasons relating to toe speeding infringement or to the failure to pay the fee or to the driver, order that the driver pay any lesser amount fixed by the court Should a motorist exercise his right to have the matter heard by the court, the demerit points recorded against him are not doubled.’’]

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19710713.2.111.1

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32657, 13 July 1971, Page 14

Word Count
382

Speeding fines Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32657, 13 July 1971, Page 14

Speeding fines Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32657, 13 July 1971, Page 14

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert