VIC Incomplete Traffic Infringement Notice - Grounds for Review?

[Iamthelaw]

The Infringements Act 2006 and the Infringements Regulations 2016 require that the prescribed particulars, which include the place of the alleged offence (reg 14(1)(h)) , be shown on the infringement notice itself and that the particulars be correct. Any error or omission means that the notice was served contrary to law (section 22(1)(a)(i) of the Act) and must be withdrawn (R v Finnie (No 2) [2004] NSWCCA 150). These are not trivial or immaterial errors that can be ignored

@Adam Cockayne Exactly.

@kimsland - It's not 'misleading and wrong' at all, whatsoever. My comments pertaining to the burden were over and above the legislative provision and the TM manual example I provided above. The way you're approaching this is mislead.

 

[kimsland]

The Infringements Act 2006 and the Infringements Regulations 2016 require that the prescribed particulars, which include the place of the alleged offence (reg 14(1)(h)) , be shown on the infringement notice itself and that the particulars be correct. Any error or omission means that the notice was served contrary to law (section 22(1)(a)(i) of the Act) and must be withdrawn (R v Finnie (No 2) [2004] NSWCCA 150). These are not trivial or immaterial errors that can be ignored

You better let the respected member know that above, he quoted clearly that it was: "infringement notice should be considered for cancellation or waiving"

Since you are going against that now, can you please tell me where 8.7.1 is incorrect? I'd love you to say that (what you said) to a judge too. Because they wouldn't be as forgiving as me You have written your reply like it's "contrary to the law" in citing an older matter. Did 8.7.1 come after that?

 

[Iamthelaw]

You better let the respected member know that above, he quoted clearly that it was: "infringement notice should be considered for cancellation or waiving"

Since you are going against that now, can you please tell me where 8.7.1 is incorrect? I'd love you to say that (what you said) to a judge too. Because they wouldn't be as forgiving as me You have written your reply like it's "contrary to the law" in citing an older matter. Did 8.7.1 come after that?

You're not quite understanding this are you.

The document uploaded is from a police manual. Procedure 8.7.1 - Sets out a procedure, whereby police (not the courts) should cancel or waive a fine missing one or more of the specified pieces of information. This was as to provide an illustration over and above the legislative provisions. Police Manuals cannot detract or alter the legislative provisions and again, this was only provided as an example to demonstrate the point.

 

[kimsland]

Police manual? Damn it!

Since I'm not going to bother reading the entire rules to catch you out, you win

 

[Arche]

Docman, does the infringement notice tell you how to challenge it? Just do it. It has nothing to do with a judge and no one here can change the outcome - you have to do it yourself.

 

[Docman2000]

Can I clarify the exact nature of the alleged offense?

As I entered a country town, I was pulled over and was asked by the the officer if I was aware that I had been speeding in a 100kph zone, to which I replied "No". He then advised that he would be issuing an infringement notice and asked if I would like to check the alleged speed on the device in his car, which I did, at no stage did I admit to speeding.

The officer then handed me the infringement notice and we went our separate ways. The Infringement notice does not contain a location of the alleged offense. Based on the comments above, I will ask for the infringement to be reviewed with the hope that it will be waived.

Any help on how I should word my application for review would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Rod]

There is no legal wording needed.

If it was me I'd be saying something like the infringement is not valid, it is missing key information, please cancel. Should you elect not to cancel the invalid infringement I reserve all my rights including seeking costs incurred in defending against the issuing of an invalid infringement.

Let them work out what is wrong. If they don't fix their error by cancellation or re-issuing with correct details take it to court stating the infringement is invalid and you want the infringement thrown out and you want costs. Hmm, might be able to ask for summary judgment, in your favour at the first hearing rather come back to court a second time for a defended hearing, I'll let someone else comment on this possibility.

 

[PeanutLuver]

It may differ from state to state as its often state specific law

- for QLD see chapter 8 - section about canceling & waiving infringement notices - in current qld police traffic manual - link below :


https://www.police.qld.gov.au/corporatedocs/OperationalPolicies/tm.htm

Yeah - check and ask for review - see what they say/do first - ask asap

QLD manual seems to talk about a senior officer reviewing it - could maybe ask transport department how / whats their process / & who you ask - check on back of infringement notice /first sper form asap.

It used to be years ago you could write to local /district superintendent but there may be a more formal process for review now days - if u seek review apply in writing quickly (before it gets too far)

For QLD, the current Jan 2017, chapter 8 on infringements (part 8.7 for cancelling / waiving them) doesnt really define whether a traffic fine will be cancelled or when - more that it's possible & that it's going to be up to the officer/more senior officer reviewing it.

It does list examples of possible factors/circumstances which may lead to cancelling/waiving - but it doesn't seem to state what woukd be a fatal flaw/s in a ticket