Bob* was riding across the Kurilpa Bridge into the city on a quiet school holiday Friday morning, also coincidentally World Car-Free Day, when … BAM, he was $464 poorer.

  • murbulOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’d really like to see the speeding fines formally challenged in some way. You hear stories from cyclists that they or their mates have had them overturned, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence of this. Maybe it’s the case that police just choose not to proceed when the fines are challenged, and avoid setting a formal precedent in the courts.

    It would also be interesting if this specific case was challenged. Like you say, it sounds like the 10km/h is supposed to be advisory, but the sign they have used is a regulatory sign which can be enforced by a literal reading of the rules. Not sure if it would hold up in court, and might come down to the judge’s attitude towards cyclists.

    • Zagorath
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      but the sign they have used is a regulatory sign

      Sort of. As someone astutely pointed out on Facebook:

      the signs don’t look like they comply with MUTCD regarding their layout, positioning, dimension’s [sic] etc.

      Which could be either an indication that they’re intended to be advisory, or just a failure to really think things through.

        • Zagorath
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I wonder if the fact that it’s not on a sign by itself, but combined with a bunch of other things, which could mean it’s unenforceable. It reminds me of (but is nowhere near as bad as) the signs on the way in to UQ:

          There are clear standard signs on the way out saying 60, but the only sign on the way in is part of a bigger sign including details about smoking, hazardous chemicals, and parking restriction hours. I’ve lived minutes away from the sign for a decade now and have ridden & walked past it many times, and didn’t even notice that sign existed until this year after someone made a comment about the speed limits online. There’s just no way you could justifiably get away with enforcing that one, given how easy it is to miss.

          The ones on Kurilpa and Goodwill are better than this, but they still mix the (advisory?) speed limit in with other stuff in a way that you could argue is confusing.

          • murbulOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Wow that sign is extra ridiculous. I think most people would struggle to read it standing right in front of it let alone driving past.

            s316 does give a lot of leeway e.g.

            (b) the sign has additional information on or with it; or

            (e) the sign is combined on a single panel with 1 or more other traffic signs; or

            The point where it becomes substantially different is pretty subjective, which IMO shouldn’t be a thing when you’re talking about road rules, but it’s sadly not the only example.