ExpertLaw.com Forums

Not the Driver for a Traffic Cam Right on Red Violation Sent by Mail Out of State

Printable View

  • 09-30-2012, 07:39 AM
    hso
    Not the Driver for a Traffic Cam Right on Red Violation Sent by Mail Out of State
    My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: New Jersey

    I live in Maine and my daughter is using my car at a college in NJ. I received a Lawrence Township Notice of Violation based on a traffic camera video of our car slowing but not completely stopping before making a permitted right on red turn. I would like to plead not guilty since I was not the driver and the violation is against the driver. Does that make sense? Is it going to be more trouble than it's worth to challenge this?
  • 09-30-2012, 08:29 AM
    PTPD22
    Re: Not the Driver for a Traffic Cam Right on Red Violation Sent by Mail Out of State
    If it was not you driving, it should be pretty to show that. Don't know about you east coast folks, but around here when you get a photo ticket, you are given a chance to talk to the citing officer (the person who actually reviewed the photo evidence and issued the citation) and review the evidence. If it is a simple matter of that officer looking at the photo of the driver and seeing that it isn't you, they will dismiss the ticket. However, they will likely try to pressure you into identifying the driver (you have no legal obligation to do so).

    The down side is that this is likely to require a personal appearance in NJ. It might be cheaper and easier, since a photo ticket won't go on your driving record (again, at least around here...things may be different in your state), to just pay the ticket.
  • 09-30-2012, 01:23 PM
    That Guy
    Re: Not the Driver for a Traffic Cam Right on Red Violation Sent by Mail Out of State
    Quote:

    Quoting hso
    View Post
    I live in Maine and my daughter is using my car at a college in NJ. I received a Lawrence Township Notice of Violation based on a traffic camera video of our car slowing but not completely stopping before making a permitted right on red turn. I would like to plead not guilty since I was not the driver and the violation is against the driver. Does that make sense? Is it going to be more trouble than it's worth to challenge this?

    Sorry but that is incorreect. New Jersey law states that the owner and the driver are jointly liable, (see underlined language below). There are exceptions though none that seem possible or viable here in my opinion, here is the statute:

    New Jersey Statutes

    Title 39 Motor Vehicles and Traffic Regulation

    39:4-8.15 Review of recorded images by law enforcement official; issuance of summons.

    4. a. In any municipality where the governing body has authorized the installation and use of a traffic control signal monitoring system, a law enforcement official of such municipality shall review the recorded images produced by the traffic control signal monitoring system. In conducting such review, the law enforcement official shall determine whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that a traffic control signal violation has occurred and shall issue, within 90 days from the date on which the violation occurred, a summons where it is deemed appropriate. A traffic control signal violation summons issued pursuant to a traffic control signal monitoring system established in accordance with this act shall be served by a law enforcement official in accordance with the Rules of Court. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the recorded images produced by the traffic control signal monitoring system shall be available for the exclusive use of any law enforcement official for the purposes of discharging the official's duties pursuant to P.L.2007, c.348 (C.39:4-8.12 et seq.). Any recorded image or information produced in connection with the traffic control signal monitoring system shall not be deemed a public record under P.L.1963, c.73 (C.47:1A-1 et seq.) or the common law concerning access to public records. The recorded images shall not be discoverable as a public record by any person, entity, or governmental agency, except upon a subpoena issued by a grand jury or a court order in a criminal matter, nor shall they be offered in evidence in any civil or administrative proceeding not directly related to a traffic control signal violation.

    Any recorded image or information produced in connection with the traffic control signal monitoring system pertaining to a specific violation shall be purged and not retained later than 60 days after the collection of any fine or penalty. If a law enforcement official does not issue a summons for a traffic control signal violation within 90 days, all recorded images and information collected pertaining to that alleged violation shall be purged within three days. Any municipality operating a traffic control signal monitoring system shall certify compliance with this subsection in the report required to be filed with the Commissioner of Transportation pursuant to section 6 of P.L.2007, c.348 (C.39:4-8.17).

    b. Except as provided in subsection c. of this section, the owner and operator shall be jointly liable for a traffic control signal violation summons issued pursuant to a traffic control signal monitoring system established in accordance with this act, unless the owner can show that the vehicle was used without his consent, express or implied. An owner who pays any fine, penalty, civil judgment, costs or administrative fees in connection with a traffic control signal violation issued pursuant to a traffic control signal monitoring system shall have the right to recover that sum from the operator in a court of competent jurisdiction.

    c. The owner of a motor vehicle who is a lessor shall not be liable for a traffic control signal violation summons issued pursuant to this act when the motor vehicle is under the control or in the possession of the lessee, if upon notice of a traffic control signal violation, the owner of the motor vehicle which was leased at the time of the offense notifies the clerk of the court where the case is pending, by an affidavit of the name and address of the lessee. The affidavit shall be in a form prescribed by the Administrative Director of the Courts.

    After providing the name and address of the lessee, the owner shall not be required to attend a hearing of the offense, unless otherwise notified by the court.

    d. In no case shall motor vehicle points or automobile insurance eligibility points pursuant to section 26 of P.L.1990, c.8 (C.17:33B-14) be assessed against any person for a violation occurring under the provisions of this act.

    e. (Deleted by amendment, P.L.2009, c.52)

    L.2007, c.348, s.4; amended 2009, c.52, s.3.

    Sections: Previous 4-8.8 4-8.9 4-8.10 4-8.11 4-8.12 4-8.13 4-8.14 4-8.15 4-8.16 4-8.17 4-8.18 4-8.19 4-8.20 4-8.21 4-9.1 Next
    Last modified: February 14, 2012

    So you are then left with the following choices:

    1. The citation must be issued within 90 of the date the alleged violation occurred. So check the "violation date', check the "issued date", and if there is more than 090 days, you can contest it on that basis.

    2. To the part stating: "... unless the owner can show that the vehicle was used without his consent, express or implied..."), you can provide a copy of a police report showing that you had reported this particular vehicle stolen prior to the commission of the act which resulted in this citation.

    3. You can pay the fine and then sue your daughter in court for the same amount and you are guaranteed that you will prevail.

    4. You can provide a copy of an existing lease contract between you and the driver along with the driver's information and an affidavit stating the vehicle was leased... But this is not likely to help out here since there is no lease between you too, or so I assume, and it will obviously result in the citation being reissues in your daughter's name!

    Looks like you have little to no option here but to pay it. Good thing is it will not result in any violation points being added to anyone's record not will it be disclosed to an insurer.
  • 09-30-2012, 03:18 PM
    davidmcbeth3
    Re: Not the Driver for a Traffic Cam Right on Red Violation Sent by Mail Out of State
    They had big issues with their red light system in NJ .. improperly calibrated and installed.

    The ticket, if it has a picture with it, is likely not admissible.

    Is the OP willing to go down to NJ to argue?
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved