Serious Flaw in the WA Fine Suspension System
Paulco
I went in to in pay my license two weeks ago, only to be told I couldn't pay
it because it's fine suspended.
It seems a fine I got for not voting in the trading referendum escelated to
a licence suspension - as a side issue I have to say that it shows how
messed up this state really is when they suspend your license for such a
pathetic matter.
Anyway, since that fine, I had a speeding fine which I didn't pay on time
(at the time it I had some big bills and it suited me better to pay the
extra at the later date) and received the pay or we'll suspend your license
letter - that came to my current address.
According to the guy I spoke to at Fines Enforcement they do not check for a
new address when they send the suspension letter - they just blindly send
them to address at time of the (so called) offence.
Three rego's, firearm and drivers licences, and the suspension letter for
the speeding fine all came here so they obviously have my new address on
record.
So I was driving for a month unlicensed including 600k trips to Perth and
driving a government car - I don't want to think about what would have
happened had I been pulled over driving the school bus full of kids.
I'm not complaining about the fine, just posting this here in case others
are in the same situation, they know who I am because they suspended my
license, all this would take is a few lines of system code to flag when
someone has had a change of address.
I wonder how many people are driving suspended because stuff is going to an
old address and yes I could have had a redirect on my mail but my ex was
supposed to forward stuff on for me.
Paul
Paulco
to was obviously not my last known as all my rego's and stuff came here.
That said, while the legalities were sorted I would be in a world of pain
because I suspect the Ed Dept frowns on unllicensed teachers driving buses
full of kids and I dare the parents of those kids would be pissed as well -
in a small country town everyone knows where everyone lives.
"Paul Saccani" <sac...@omen.net.au> wrote in message
news:m131061lio4odh1g8...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 29 May 2010 10:22:03 +0800, "Paulco" <pau...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I wonder how many people are driving suspended because stuff is going to
>>an
>>old address and yes I could have had a redirect on my mail but my ex was
>>supposed to forward stuff on for me.
>
> None. Case law has determined that in such cases the suspension is
> invalid. The state didn't even make a defence in the court of appeal,
> but admitted liability.
>
> Section 5(2) of the Fines, Penalties and Infringement Notices
> Enforcement Act 1994 states -
> **************
> A document issued under this Act may be served by post on a person by
> properly addressing and posting it by pre-paid post as a letter to the
> person at the person's last known address.
> Section 5(4) reads -
> In the absence of an address for a person from other sources, a
> person's last known address may be taken to be the person's current
> address shown in the records of the Director General.
> ***************
> Absent a valid notice of suspension, there is no suspension.
>
> The state solicitor conceded that all such suspensions were invalid in
> the court of appeal on 7 July 2006, to wit;
>
> "In our view, the consequence of the invalidly of the licence
> suspension orders is that they were invalid from the time they were
> made and for all purposes. Therefore, they can be treated as if they
> were never made in the first place."
>
> In this case, the plaintiff (the minister of Police at the time of the
> invalid fine suspension!) was awarded $15,000 compensation.
>
> Notwithstanding this matter of law, the FER still bluff the public,
> and people admit to offences that they have never committed in law,
> unaware of the bluff. Most unsatisfactory.
> --
> Cheers
> Paul Saccani
> Perth, Western Australia.
D-L473
They should have the good manners to give you a phonecall over something serious, not
just assume you got the memo. Printing a pretty document and mailing it regular post does
not mean receipt, yet they'll try and legally hold you to that in a court of law.
I know plenty of businesses do, including the tax office.
Legal system is so screwed up anyway, there is little justice to be had apart from what you
are capable of metting out yourself nowadays...
In article <ItSdnc2-UZGpCJ3R...@westnet.com.au>, pau...@nospam.com says...
Paulco
to unsuspend my licence over the phone and give me a reference number to
quote the cops if I got pulled up before the computer caught up.
"D-L473" <tt!@//net.net.au> wrote in message
news:MPG.266b86a47...@216.196.97.142...
D-L473
> The one shining light was that when I rang Fines Enforcement they were able
> to unsuspend my licence over the phone and give me a reference number to
> quote the cops if I got pulled up before the computer caught up.
Which means if they have this procedure in place it happens to people ALL the time.
Paulco
"D-L473" <tt!@//net.net.au> wrote in message
news:MPG.266bb5607...@216.196.97.142...
Stephen X. Carter
>WA is becoming a nanny state.
I'll read that as a typo for 'Police State'. Sadly.
--
steve.hat.stephencarter.not.com.but.net
Nothing is Beatle Proof!!
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.com/mr_kite*
Mr Kite posters and more at http://www.zazzle.co.uk/mr_kite*
D-L473
> On Sat, 29 May 2010 20:17:08 +0800, D-L473 <tt!@//net.net.au> wrote:
>
> >Legal system is so screwed up anyway, there is little justice to be had apart from what you
> >are capable of metting out yourself nowadays...
>
> countries around the world with a better one. I haven't done a survey
> though...
I disagree, in the US, despite their many failings, have stopped playing the fool with
criminals and lock them up, even the corporate ones. Something we seem unable to do here.
> As for meting (sp?) out your own justice, I think Hollywood's got a
> lot to answer for.
Yes Hollywood does have a lot to answer for. However justice, (and injustice) get metted
out every day, you just don't hear about it, in your comfortable smoking armchair.
Bill Cullen
> I disagree, in the US, despite their many failings, have stopped playing the fool with
> criminals and lock them up, even the corporate ones. Something we seem unable to do here.
Much of Australia's mythology is built on our convict past. We're
brought up on stories of convicts given seven year sentences and
transported to Australia merely for stealing a loaf of bread or a
handkerchief. If you remember your history lessons I'm sure you'll
recall that Britain was experiencing a crime wave at the time. I'm sure
you will also recall that such tough sentences didn't make much of a
difference to the crime rate.
>> As for meting (sp?) out your own justice, I think Hollywood's got a
>> lot to answer for.
>
> Yes Hollywood does have a lot to answer for. However justice, (and injustice) get metted
> out every day, you just don't hear about it, in your comfortable smoking armchair.
Would you care to elaborate?
Bill Cullen
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 08:42:44 +0800, "Paulco"<pau...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> WA is becoming a nanny state.
>
> I'll read that as a typo for 'Police State'. Sadly.
W.A. has always been the closest to a police state in this country.
Stephen X. Carter
wrote:
>D-L473 said the following on 30/05/2010 10:36 PM:
>> I disagree, in the US, despite their many failings, have stopped playing the fool with
>> criminals and lock them up, even the corporate ones. Something we seem unable to do here.
>
>Much of Australia's mythology is built on our convict past. We're
>brought up on stories of convicts given seven year sentences and
>transported to Australia merely for stealing a loaf of bread or a
>handkerchief. If you remember your history lessons I'm sure you'll
>recall that Britain was experiencing a crime wave at the time. I'm sure
>you will also recall that such tough sentences didn't make much of a
>difference to the crime rate.
And. Ironically. Because the USA was now independent, Great Britain
had to find somewhere else to ship its convicts.
Paulco
cops.
"Bill Cullen" <bi...@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:DZqdnRXIG5ygIZ_R...@westnet.com.au...
Woofdog
"Paulco" <pau...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:yIadndBGWOjS553R...@westnet.com.au...
> Hei Guys,
> I went in to in pay my license two weeks ago, only to be told I couldn't
> pay it because it's fine suspended.
>
Eddie
> Paul
>
Paulco
get used to it.
"Woofdog" <woo...@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
news:zM-dndLhQb96iJ7R...@westnet.com.au...
Stephen X. Carter
et used to it.
>
>"Woofdog" <woo...@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
>news:zM-dndLhQb96iJ7R...@westnet.com.au...
>>
>> "Paulco" <pau...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:yIadndBGWOjS553R...@westnet.com.au...
>>> Hei Guys,
>>> I went in to in pay my license two weeks ago, only to be told I couldn't
>>> pay it because it's fine suspended.
>>> supposed to forward stuff on for me.
>>>
>> Wow, too much top posting in replies....
>Been top posting for the last ten years and will be for the next ten years -
>get used to it.
To paraphrase:
Been engaged in inconsiderate and antisocial behavior for the past ten
years and will be for the next ten years. Up yours.
Wonderful to know that our kids are being taught by someone with such
refined social skills!
D-L473
> I dunno, Kevin Bloody Wilson used to get plenty of grief from the Queensland
> cops.
Which is quite ironic considering what some of those QLD cops were probably up to. :)
Woofdog
"d'Wooluf" <bl...@xyz.com> wrote in message
news:3b1706lesubf086n2...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 16:38:02 +0800, Stephen X. Carter
> <steve@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 May 2010 16:32:59 +0800, "Paulco" <pau...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> I thought he was restrained and almost polite... even by the standards
> of people other than Paulco. :)
>
> You may not have liked the message. That's another thing.
Yep, I was expecting a lot more......
Eddie
>
> --
> John
Paulco
with Kangaroos.
Qld cops are still red neck, my brother lived in Gympie in 04/05 and talked
of the cops giving aboriginals a lift to the city limits - literally not
letting them in to town unless they had a good reason for going.
"D-L473" <tt!@//net.net.au> wrote in message
news:MPG.266e14df...@216.196.97.142...
Aubrey Adams
Yeah, is Charlie Court's Section 54B of the Police Act still there?
Aubrey
D-L473
> Subject: Re: Serious Flaw in the WA Fine Suspension System
> From: Paulco <pau...@nospam.com>
> Newsgroups: iinet.general
>
> Well Kev used to say that Qld cops were proof of man sexually interferring
> with Kangaroos.
> Qld cops are still red neck, my brother lived in Gympie in 04/05 and talked
> of the cops giving aboriginals a lift to the city limits - literally not
> letting them in to town unless they had a good reason for going.
Old school policing, infringing on their civil rights much? :)
QLD does have a lot of red-necks in it, in saying that, there are good people
among them, so they're not all bad. :) QLD / SA will always be way more
red-neck than WA I reckon.
Bill Cullen
> Yeah, is Charlie Court's Section 54B of the Police Act still there?
I'm pretty sure that was one of the first things the Burke Government
revoked on coming to power.
I dare say the younger members of this newsgroup, and the more recent
arrivals to the State of Excitement wouldn't know what we're talking about.
Simon Jones
I had to look up how to activate the killfile.
--
Simon.
Jason Jordan
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 16:32:59 +0800, "Paulco"<pau...@nospam.com> wrote:
> et used to it.
>> "Woofdog"<woo...@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:zM-dndLhQb96iJ7R...@westnet.com.au...
>>> "Paulco"<pau...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:yIadndBGWOjS553R...@westnet.com.au...
>>>> Hei Guys,
>>>> I went in to in pay my license two weeks ago, only to be told I couldn't
>>>> pay it because it's fine suspended.
>>>> supposed to forward stuff on for me.
>>> Wow, too much top posting in replies....
>> Been top posting for the last ten years and will be for the next ten years -
>> get used to it.
>
> To paraphrase:
> Been engaged in inconsiderate and antisocial behavior for the past ten
> years and will be for the next ten years. Up yours.
>
> Wonderful to know that our kids are being taught by someone with such
> refined social skills!
I filtered him out ages ago due to his bad attitude & top posting.
The only time I ever see his nonsense now is when others reply to him.
Cheers, Jason
D-L473
What are you talking about?
Bill Cullen
Section 54B
D-L473
For the benefit of the newsgroup:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) ACT 1999 - SECT 54B
Sentencing procedure
54B Sentencing procedure
(1) This section applies when a court imposes a sentence of imprisonment for an offence set out in the Table to this
Division.
(2) When determining the sentence for the offence, the court is to set the standard non-parole period as the non-parole
period for the offence unless the court determines that there are reasons for setting a non-parole period that is
longer or shorter than the standard non-parole period.
(3) The reasons for which the court may set a non-parole period that is longer or shorter than the standard non-parole
period are only those referred to in section 21A.
(4) The court must make a record of its reasons for increasing or reducing the standard non-parole period. The court
must identify in the record of its reasons each factor that it took into account.
(5) The failure of a court to comply with this section does not invalidate the sentence.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D-L473
I will never killfile Paulco.
Stephen X. Carter
wrote:
>Wrong act. It was S54B of the Police Act, 1892, that section being
>repealed by the Public Meetings and Processions Act, 1984.
>
>In brief, gatherings of more than 3 people required Police
>permission.
Now you've blown it!
Given that Johnson & Barnett monitor Teh Internets, he'll see this,
remember (or learn about) this wonderful idea, and bring it back in!
D-L473
> On Wed, 02 Jun 2010 10:26:42 +0800, Paul Saccani <sac...@omen.net.au>
> wrote:
>
>
> >Wrong act. It was S54B of the Police Act, 1892, that section being
> >repealed by the Public Meetings and Processions Act, 1984.
> >
> >In brief, gatherings of more than 3 people required Police
> >permission.
>
> Now you've blown it!
>
> Given that Johnson & Barnett monitor Teh Internets, he'll see this,
> remember (or learn about) this wonderful idea, and bring it back in!
That's funny, because the same policy was in effect in South Africa during
Apartheid and probably in Eastern Europe under Communist control.
A gathering of 3 people was deemed to be an unauthorised assembly that could
be broken up by the police by law.
In addition to that, people could be detained without trial for weeks for
interrogation.
D-L473
> Wrong act. It was S54B of the Police Act, 1892, that section being
> repealed by the Public Meetings and Processions Act, 1984.
Thanks for clearing that up Paul, I Google'd the wrong thing.
Stephen X. Carter
wrote:
>
>In brief, gatherings of more than 3 people required Police
>permission.
Oh well, that buggers up the Bridge Club's plans!
D-L473
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 16:38:02 +0800, Stephen X. Carter
> <steve@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
> >et used to it.
> >>
> >>"Woofdog" <woo...@kennel.com.au> wrote in message
> >>news:zM-dndLhQb96iJ7R...@westnet.com.au...
> >>>
> >>> "Paulco" <pau...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:yIadndBGWOjS553R...@westnet.com.au...
> >>>> Hei Guys,
> >>>> I went in to in pay my license two weeks ago, only to be told I couldn't
> >>>> pay it because it's fine suspended.
> >>>> supposed to forward stuff on for me.
> >>>>
> >>> Wow, too much top posting in replies....
> >
> >
> >>Been top posting for the last ten years and will be for the next ten years -
> >>get used to it.
> >
> >To paraphrase:
> >Been engaged in inconsiderate and antisocial behavior for the past ten
> >years and will be for the next ten years. Up yours.
> >
> >Wonderful to know that our kids are being taught by someone with such
> >refined social skills!
>
> of people other than Paulco. :)
>
> You may not have liked the message. That's another thing.
Maybe he will teach those kids to be more independent thinkers, albiet he will
probably crank out a new generation of newsgroup top-posters, but at least they
will understand what a Usenet newsgroup is. No KIDS, it's not FaceBook! :P