Citation by Mail for Gridlock Violation, No Picture Attached, VC 22526a

[tcgirl]

My question involves a traffic citation from the state of: CA
I received a Parking Citation from City of West Hollywood for VC 22526A (gridlock). There was no picture attached, nor do they reference photo evidence. The intersection referenced is 9200 block Sunset/Doheny. I do not believe there are red-light cameras at that intersection. The time they list on the so-called parking citation is 7:00pm - and I am pretty sure I wasn't there at that time. The ticket is not signed by an officer and does not reference any Court to contact.

Is this ticket legal? I haven't contacted WEHO or acknowledged the ticket...

[Mr. Knowitall]

Why do you believe it was a camera ticket, as opposed to a ticket based upon the observations of an officer who was not positioned to pull you over?

[That Guy]

My question involves a traffic citation from the state of: CA
I received a Parking Citation from City of West Hollywood for VC 22526A (gridlock). There was no picture attached, nor do they reference photo evidence. The intersection referenced is 9200 block Sunset/Doheny. I do not believe there are red-light cameras at that intersection. The time they list on the so-called parking citation is 7:00pm - and I am pretty sure I wasn't there at that time. The ticket is not signed by an officer and does not reference any Court to contact.

Is this ticket legal? I haven't contacted WEHO or acknowledged the ticket...

I think you will find that the ticket is in fact legit (you can register and verify its validity HERE if you'd like), that it is not a red light camera ticket nor is it related to the presence of cameras at several intersections in the city of West Hollywood. instead they are issued and mailed pursuant to California Vehicle code section 40202 which states:

40202(d) If, during the issuance of a notice of parking violation, without regard to whether the vehicle was initially attended or unattended, the vehicle is driven away prior to attaching the notice to the vehicle, the issuing officer shall file the notice with the processing agency. The processing agency shall mail, within 15 calendar days of issuance of the notice of parking violation, a copy of the notice of parking violation or transmit an electronic facsimile of the notice to the registered owner.

These citations are not based upon nor do they need to be validated via photographic evidence; instead, the citing officer's statement is sufficient (and typically, the fact that a citation was issued is sufficient proof that a violation occurred in the presence of an officer). And lastly, this is issued as a parking citation, the officer # is sufficient substitute for his signature, in fact, none of the new electronically generated parking citations are signed bu the issuing officer; and as any other parking ticket, these are handled through parking enforcement (although if you do decide to appeal it, the third level of the appeals process will be handled by a judge in the superior court having jurisdiction over that area).

If you weren't there at that time, is it possible that someone else was driving your car? Either way, and with you (presumably) being the registered owner of the vehicle, any citation issued by parking enforcement would be issued in your name anyways.

So, first thing you should check to see if they in fact did issue and mail the citation within 15 days of the date it was issued.

Fortunately for you, you aren't alone... By my count, we have had five or six people post about having received a similar citation.. Some with, others without a photograph. Admittedly, I had a slow start in that thread, and while there are no definitive answers as of yet, we are in fact awaiting an update from the original posted who started that thread. And rather than rehash everything that was discussed there, you will find it here: West Hollywood Red Light Camera Gridlock Ticket.

[tcgirl]

Thank you for your reply. They did send within 15 days. How is that they can issue a "parking" citation for a moving vehicle? I wasn't "parking" or "parked". This seems to me to be a way for WEHO to circumvent the issue of red-light camera's no longer being valid, with random citations issued without the driver's knowledge. I drive thru that intersection 5 days a week... it's an odd one because the lights are segregated so both directions aren't travelling at the same time. Thus when I'm making a left turn from Doheny onto Sunset, the oncoming traffic (which has a red-light) often turns into the lane I'm approaching before I get there, thus leaving me hanging.
Is it worth it for me to appeal? Sounds like, from what I've already read, that I would have to go to the 3rd appeal (which is outside of WEHO) to get the proper review - which is annoying to say the least (and I'm sure they count on many people giving up and paying before getting to that stage??)

I checked out the other post you referred to. The citation and notice are pretty much identical to mine (except the streets are different). Same Officer number. However - that one had a picture attached from a red-light camera. So because they do not say mine was a red-light camera, they get around the issue of them being unforceable?

[lostintime]

West Hollywood sure isn't too liberal when it comes to gridlock.

[That Guy]

How is that they can issue a "parking" citation for a moving vehicle? I wasn't "parking" or "parked".

VC 22526 is part of Division 11, Chapter 9 of the Vehicle Code which is titled: STOPPING, STANDING, AND PARKING...

This seems to me to be a way for WEHO to circumvent the issue of red-light camera's no longer being valid

For the record, there is nothing that shows that Automated Red Light citations are no longer valid; they are no longer being issued by some municipalities, that does not make them invalid.

In fact, here is a note you will find on the Traffic Page of the L.A. Superior Court Website:

July 29, 2011: The City of Los Angeles has decided to end its red light camera program on July 31, 2011. The City's action does not stop the processing of outstanding red-light citations. It does not eliminate penalties associated with red-light citations. It does not constitute grounds for a refund of any money paid on such a citation. Anyone issued a red-light citation must resolve it within the specified time limits or face certain penalties as prescribed by law.

The vehicle code sections authorizing the issuing of those citations are still operative and have not been repealed, with no plans of doing so. And last on this point, Red Light Cameras in WEHO are still up and running, and last check with the contractor who does the work, they still do get maintained and tested twice a week.

Is it worth it for me to appeal? Sounds like, from what I've already read, that I would have to go to the 3rd appeal (which is outside of WEHO) to get the proper review - which is annoying to say the least (and I'm sure they count on many people giving up and paying before getting to that stage??)

For $118, I would. As for success rate, really hard to predict. I think the defense I outlined in the other thread is definitely worth the shot. Its up to you to go the distance. Heck, pretend you're at work for the extra 3 hours it might take to go through the 3 stages. Pretend you're volunteering at a nearby shelter for 3 hours and if the refund ever comes, you can turn it around as a donation to charity.