As part of creating the site www.SpeedCameraLocations.com.au I've learnt quite a few things that I and others often don't understand or know, and as a result, we can end up getting fined.
I read quite a few people on the internet who believe they were in the intersection when they incurred a red light camera fine.
The following is one such example. The person in question wonders whether they should take this court as from their understanding, they'd already entered the intersection. The cars had to stop as a car from the opposite direction went through the yellow light delaying them.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/comments/8wo64f/red_light_camera_fine_shows_me_in_the/
Here is a link to the two photos taken for the red light camera fine.
https://imgur.com/OOsobaz
For convenience the following is a copy of the first photo showing the car past the stop line.
This situation is extremely common and I'm sure most of us have been in this situation.
The first car is well into the intersection and there's enough room for a second car in the intersection, or is there?
The location is the intersection of Balwyn Road and Whitehorse Road, Balwyn. The camera is a wet film camera.
Keep in mind everything here is just my thoughts. I'm not qualified in any legal way so my opinion is just that and yours is just as valid.
I always believed once I was over the white stop line I was in the intersection. From what I've read this isn't the case. The intersection is the imaginary lines where the two roads cross such that cars could collide.
The stop line is actually quite a distance back from the intersection. There's a pedestrian crossing area before you reach the intersection.
For convenience this link is for the detail page from my Speed Camera Locations site. Using this link you can quickly see further details using Google Street View, Google Maps and a dash cam video.
We can see using the Google Maps aerial view more detail.
The line of the pedestrian crossing nearest the intersection is close to the intersection, but not quite at the intersection.
The distance from before the stop line to the intersection side of the pedestrian line is approximately 5.4m. The width of the two lanes on Whitehorse Road the cars are turning into is approximately 8m.
The SUVs turning I'd estimate to be around 4.7-4.8m.
There's physically not enough room in the intersection for two cars to turn right from Balwyn Road into Whitehorse Road.
That means the second car, the car in question, was not fully in the intersection. There's no way to know if the car was actually partly in the intersection, or not in the intersection at all. Being over the stop line is not the same as being in the intersection.
There are two pieces of information people need to consider.
1. The placement of the sensors in the road.
In this case it's hard to see where the sensors are in the road. The sensor closest to the intersection is just passed the stop line towards the intersection. It looks like the second sensor my be under the stop line.
If the car was partly in the intersection, based on the length of the typical SUV the car would have been past the sensor and wouldn't have been detected. This may mean the car wasn't as far forward as the driver thought they were.
What this person did is something I'm sure most of us have done.
Perhaps since the white SUV in front is blocking the ability for the second car to proceed, the second car shouldn't have proceeded past the stop line. However that depends on the definition of blocking.
From what I've learnt creating the Speed Camera Locations site is that we need to think carefully how we drive, and in particular, at intersections where there's a red light camera.
Many people turning right at this intersection may consider there's enough room for two people to be in the intersection at the same time. There isn't.
Many people turning left will pull forward to turn left into the left lane nearest the kerb around the corner, particularly if there's pedestrians crossing. This isn't a good idea as it is very easy for the rear of the car to be over the sensor. The distance from the sensor to the intersection appears to be around 4.5m and that's less than a small car's length. It is better to move further forward as though you're turning left into the second lane.
We shouldn't have to drive like this, but it's the only way to ensure you don't get fined. The fine is considerable and the time and effort of contesting a fine is considerable, including the risk of additional costs if you lose. For most people it isn't worth the time, effort and risk of contesting a fine, even if you think you're in the right.
Did this person do anything wrong? The government thinks so and in the end, unless something changes, that's what gets enforced.
For us as drivers we need to be more aware, more careful. Perhaps improve our driving skills, perhaps adjust our driving style to minimise potentially being fined.
Be aware of where red light and speed cameras are located. A small error in judgement can be very costly.
If you don't already, move further forward into the intersection when turning left or right. In particular, make sure the rear of your car is completely in the intersection. If you're at an intersection with a camera, keep in mind those road sensors can be quite a distance forward of the stop line, and in one case, I've seen one in the intersection.
I hope these thoughts help others. It's certainly helped me to learn from others.
Kelvin Eldridge
www.SpeedCameraLocations.com.au
Update: 14/02/2020
Victorian Road Rules 2017
On page 172 of the PDF (page numbered 156) using section 128 Entering blocked intersections, it states: A driver must not enter an intersection if the driver cannot drive through the intersection because the intersection, or a road beyond the intersection, is blocked.
One question I'd have is whether or not the road is considered blocked if there's already one car in the intersection waiting to turn. The car is giving way so it's hard to say if this would be considered blocked.
On page 514 of the PDF (page numbered 498) the dictionary definition: intersection means the area where 2 or more roads (except any road related area) meet, and includes—(a) any area of the roads where vehicles travelling on different roads might collide; and (b) the place where any slip lane between the roads meets the road into which traffic on the slip lane may turn—but does not include any road related area;
On page 512 of the PDF (page numbered 496) the dictionary definition: enter an intersection or crossing, for the driver of a vehicle or a train, means enter the intersection or crossing with any part of the vehicle or train;
For the car in question there's one thing it is hard to prove conclusively with the photos. Where the car was located before it moved. That is had the car entered the intersection, even partly, because the above definition of enter means with any part of the car. If they were partly in the intersection then this I'd suspect means they'd entered the intersection. However, if you look at the picture closely the first car is quite far into a turn when the camera went off. If the red light changed, and half a second had elapsed (the time before the first photo is taken), then the front of the car in question is marginally in the intersection.
Measuring our small SUV the distance from the front of the car to the front of the tyre where it would meet the road is 80cm. This could potentially place the front of the car in the intersection., the white line is just in front of the front tyre.
The things missing is the time when the photo was taken after the light had changed to red, the position and how the in-ground sensor works.
In Victoria, if I'm right, the photo is not taken until at least half a second after the light changes red. If the cars moved off after this time and photo would be taken instantly, and that is the position of the car as it just moved, shows the car is most likely in the intersection.
However, if you think about the in-ground sensor, this sensor is placed just in front of the stop line. Which the car had to move over or off for the camera to take a photo, then the car may have been further back when it took off. That is the car was not in the intersection (the intersection as defined the the road rules dictionary). If the car was further back, there's plenty of room for the car to have simply stayed where it was and not proceed into the intersection. Yes the car would be past the stop line, and yes the car is potentially blocking pedestrians, but the person would not have been fined.
The one unknown here is how sensitive the in-ground sensor is and when it sets off the camera. Is it possible for a car slightly past the sensor to set the camera off? Only VicRoads engineers could answer this question. If the car was on the last sensor or past the sensor (but still causing some inductance) the distance is around 4.1m (using Google Maps). The car being longer than 4.1m means the car may have already been in the intersection.
I was hoping after all the further information I'd be able to say with confidence whether this car should or shouldn't have been fined. Unfortunately I can't say because I don't know 100% how the in-ground sensor works. If the rear of the car was over the last sensor, the front of the car in the intersection, and the car took off, could that set off the camera? I simply don't know. If that is the case the car should probably not be fined in my opinion.
If it was me I'd certainly want to test that sensor to see how sensitive it was. If the rear of the car can be over the sensor (meaning the car has entered the intersection) when it takes off, and this sets off the camera, that potentially means people are getting fined who shouldn't be.
The following picture is from Google Street View and shows two cars in a similar situation turning. The difference is the first car isn't as far forward and the second car is also not as far forward. The second car is also a smaller car.
The first in-ground sensor is clearly visible. It is located on the stop line. The second in-ground sensor is slightly forward of the stop line but not visible as it is under the car. There is not much space between the two sensors. I'd certainly want to test the last possible position the sensor could set off the camera. Note the red car in this photo is not in the intersection and has not entered the intersection (even partly) . Given the space we leave between cars, even if the red car moved closer to the white car, the red car would still not be in the intersection. The red car would then be forward of the stop line and blocking the pedestrian area, but not in the intersection.
Update: 15/02/2020
There's two further points that I find interesting. In the comments on the Reddit post the person indicates they think they're in the intersection once they are over the stop line. This is not correct as this isn't how intersection is defined.
The second, is if you look at the white car in front turning, when the picture was taken the white car had moved considerably across both lanes of the stopped oncoming traffic. This photo would indicate the white car has moved a reasonable distance. The second grey car you'd then think would have also moved a reasonable amount since it was following the white car. Not necessarily but we could assume this to be the case. They grey car must have moved at least some distance to set off the camera. If that is true then the grey car may have moved considerably as well and if this were the case the grey car was more than likely at or over the white stop line, and given the distance to the intersection and the length of the car, the grey car was most likely not in the intersection, even partly.
In other words, it is most likely the grey car did move into the intersection and continued through the intersection after the lights had changed to red.
The two main points I was aiming to make with this example were:
1. The intersection isn't where the white stop line is. It is where vehicles travelling on two different roads might collide.
2. It is important to realise the in-ground sensor that triggers the red light camera is further forward than you would think. The second sensor is usually past the stop line towards the intersection. I've seen one sensor in the intersection (a T intersection). If you go over, are on, or even possibly very near the sensor, moving the car forward could set off the camera. If in doubt, it is probably best not to move the car once the traffic light turns red.
I read quite a few people on the internet who believe they were in the intersection when they incurred a red light camera fine.
The following is one such example. The person in question wonders whether they should take this court as from their understanding, they'd already entered the intersection. The cars had to stop as a car from the opposite direction went through the yellow light delaying them.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/comments/8wo64f/red_light_camera_fine_shows_me_in_the/
Here is a link to the two photos taken for the red light camera fine.
https://imgur.com/OOsobaz
For convenience the following is a copy of the first photo showing the car past the stop line.
The first car is well into the intersection and there's enough room for a second car in the intersection, or is there?
The location is the intersection of Balwyn Road and Whitehorse Road, Balwyn. The camera is a wet film camera.
Keep in mind everything here is just my thoughts. I'm not qualified in any legal way so my opinion is just that and yours is just as valid.
I always believed once I was over the white stop line I was in the intersection. From what I've read this isn't the case. The intersection is the imaginary lines where the two roads cross such that cars could collide.
The stop line is actually quite a distance back from the intersection. There's a pedestrian crossing area before you reach the intersection.
For convenience this link is for the detail page from my Speed Camera Locations site. Using this link you can quickly see further details using Google Street View, Google Maps and a dash cam video.
We can see using the Google Maps aerial view more detail.
The distance from before the stop line to the intersection side of the pedestrian line is approximately 5.4m. The width of the two lanes on Whitehorse Road the cars are turning into is approximately 8m.
The SUVs turning I'd estimate to be around 4.7-4.8m.
There's physically not enough room in the intersection for two cars to turn right from Balwyn Road into Whitehorse Road.
That means the second car, the car in question, was not fully in the intersection. There's no way to know if the car was actually partly in the intersection, or not in the intersection at all. Being over the stop line is not the same as being in the intersection.
There are two pieces of information people need to consider.
1. The placement of the sensors in the road.
In this case it's hard to see where the sensors are in the road. The sensor closest to the intersection is just passed the stop line towards the intersection. It looks like the second sensor my be under the stop line.
If the car was partly in the intersection, based on the length of the typical SUV the car would have been past the sensor and wouldn't have been detected. This may mean the car wasn't as far forward as the driver thought they were.
What this person did is something I'm sure most of us have done.
Perhaps since the white SUV in front is blocking the ability for the second car to proceed, the second car shouldn't have proceeded past the stop line. However that depends on the definition of blocking.
From what I've learnt creating the Speed Camera Locations site is that we need to think carefully how we drive, and in particular, at intersections where there's a red light camera.
Many people turning right at this intersection may consider there's enough room for two people to be in the intersection at the same time. There isn't.
Many people turning left will pull forward to turn left into the left lane nearest the kerb around the corner, particularly if there's pedestrians crossing. This isn't a good idea as it is very easy for the rear of the car to be over the sensor. The distance from the sensor to the intersection appears to be around 4.5m and that's less than a small car's length. It is better to move further forward as though you're turning left into the second lane.
We shouldn't have to drive like this, but it's the only way to ensure you don't get fined. The fine is considerable and the time and effort of contesting a fine is considerable, including the risk of additional costs if you lose. For most people it isn't worth the time, effort and risk of contesting a fine, even if you think you're in the right.
Did this person do anything wrong? The government thinks so and in the end, unless something changes, that's what gets enforced.
For us as drivers we need to be more aware, more careful. Perhaps improve our driving skills, perhaps adjust our driving style to minimise potentially being fined.
Be aware of where red light and speed cameras are located. A small error in judgement can be very costly.
If you don't already, move further forward into the intersection when turning left or right. In particular, make sure the rear of your car is completely in the intersection. If you're at an intersection with a camera, keep in mind those road sensors can be quite a distance forward of the stop line, and in one case, I've seen one in the intersection.
I hope these thoughts help others. It's certainly helped me to learn from others.
Kelvin Eldridge
www.SpeedCameraLocations.com.au
Update: 14/02/2020
Victorian Road Rules 2017
On page 172 of the PDF (page numbered 156) using section 128 Entering blocked intersections, it states: A driver must not enter an intersection if the driver cannot drive through the intersection because the intersection, or a road beyond the intersection, is blocked.
One question I'd have is whether or not the road is considered blocked if there's already one car in the intersection waiting to turn. The car is giving way so it's hard to say if this would be considered blocked.
On page 514 of the PDF (page numbered 498) the dictionary definition: intersection means the area where 2 or more roads (except any road related area) meet, and includes—(a) any area of the roads where vehicles travelling on different roads might collide; and (b) the place where any slip lane between the roads meets the road into which traffic on the slip lane may turn—but does not include any road related area;
On page 512 of the PDF (page numbered 496) the dictionary definition: enter an intersection or crossing, for the driver of a vehicle or a train, means enter the intersection or crossing with any part of the vehicle or train;
For the car in question there's one thing it is hard to prove conclusively with the photos. Where the car was located before it moved. That is had the car entered the intersection, even partly, because the above definition of enter means with any part of the car. If they were partly in the intersection then this I'd suspect means they'd entered the intersection. However, if you look at the picture closely the first car is quite far into a turn when the camera went off. If the red light changed, and half a second had elapsed (the time before the first photo is taken), then the front of the car in question is marginally in the intersection.
Measuring our small SUV the distance from the front of the car to the front of the tyre where it would meet the road is 80cm. This could potentially place the front of the car in the intersection., the white line is just in front of the front tyre.
The things missing is the time when the photo was taken after the light had changed to red, the position and how the in-ground sensor works.
In Victoria, if I'm right, the photo is not taken until at least half a second after the light changes red. If the cars moved off after this time and photo would be taken instantly, and that is the position of the car as it just moved, shows the car is most likely in the intersection.
However, if you think about the in-ground sensor, this sensor is placed just in front of the stop line. Which the car had to move over or off for the camera to take a photo, then the car may have been further back when it took off. That is the car was not in the intersection (the intersection as defined the the road rules dictionary). If the car was further back, there's plenty of room for the car to have simply stayed where it was and not proceed into the intersection. Yes the car would be past the stop line, and yes the car is potentially blocking pedestrians, but the person would not have been fined.
The one unknown here is how sensitive the in-ground sensor is and when it sets off the camera. Is it possible for a car slightly past the sensor to set the camera off? Only VicRoads engineers could answer this question. If the car was on the last sensor or past the sensor (but still causing some inductance) the distance is around 4.1m (using Google Maps). The car being longer than 4.1m means the car may have already been in the intersection.
I was hoping after all the further information I'd be able to say with confidence whether this car should or shouldn't have been fined. Unfortunately I can't say because I don't know 100% how the in-ground sensor works. If the rear of the car was over the last sensor, the front of the car in the intersection, and the car took off, could that set off the camera? I simply don't know. If that is the case the car should probably not be fined in my opinion.
If it was me I'd certainly want to test that sensor to see how sensitive it was. If the rear of the car can be over the sensor (meaning the car has entered the intersection) when it takes off, and this sets off the camera, that potentially means people are getting fined who shouldn't be.
The following picture is from Google Street View and shows two cars in a similar situation turning. The difference is the first car isn't as far forward and the second car is also not as far forward. The second car is also a smaller car.
Update: 15/02/2020
There's two further points that I find interesting. In the comments on the Reddit post the person indicates they think they're in the intersection once they are over the stop line. This is not correct as this isn't how intersection is defined.
The second, is if you look at the white car in front turning, when the picture was taken the white car had moved considerably across both lanes of the stopped oncoming traffic. This photo would indicate the white car has moved a reasonable distance. The second grey car you'd then think would have also moved a reasonable amount since it was following the white car. Not necessarily but we could assume this to be the case. They grey car must have moved at least some distance to set off the camera. If that is true then the grey car may have moved considerably as well and if this were the case the grey car was more than likely at or over the white stop line, and given the distance to the intersection and the length of the car, the grey car was most likely not in the intersection, even partly.
In other words, it is most likely the grey car did move into the intersection and continued through the intersection after the lights had changed to red.
The two main points I was aiming to make with this example were:
1. The intersection isn't where the white stop line is. It is where vehicles travelling on two different roads might collide.
2. It is important to realise the in-ground sensor that triggers the red light camera is further forward than you would think. The second sensor is usually past the stop line towards the intersection. I've seen one sensor in the intersection (a T intersection). If you go over, are on, or even possibly very near the sensor, moving the car forward could set off the camera. If in doubt, it is probably best not to move the car once the traffic light turns red.
No comments:
Post a Comment