Radar ticket question

[Fish along]

So when a vehicle gets photographed by radar is this an automatic fine? or has this have to be reviewed by someone like a police officer before being issued.thank you for any replies.:)

[AI 6.5]

So when a vehicle gets photographed by radar is this an automatic fine? or has this have to be reviewed by someone like a police officer before being issued.thank you for any replies.:)

It's an automatic fine to the Registered owner unless it was determined to be issued in error ie a problem with the actual machine itself. If then it would likely not be sent out in the first place. Your only recourse is court or pay it early and they may reduce it.

[Fish along]

It's an automatic fine to the Registered owner unless it was determined to be issued in error ie a problem with the actual machine itself. If then it would likely not be sent out in the first place. Your only recourse is court or pay it early and they may reduce it.

Thank you for replying,so who then would determine the error?a police officer,or some technical person?

[Talking moose]

Thank you for replying,so who then would determine the error?a police officer,or some technical person?

Should be a court date no? Or is photo radar different than regular tickets in that regard?

[Talking moose]

And after feb 1st all you do is give them 50 bucks and someone will decide if it’s an error or not.

[C2C3PO]

Thank you for replying,so who then would determine the error?a police officer,or some technical person?

Photo enforcement was privatized long ago. One of their ( sub-contracted firm awarded the contract) employees is responsible for viewing the infractions before issuance. Not aware of any sworn police officers employed in this capacity any longer.

[Fish along]

Should be a court date no? Or is photo radar different than regular tickets in that regard?

Im just asking a general question,no tickets involved.Thanks for replying:)

[kevinhits]

Years ago I went to the courthouse to view the photo in it's entiriety because if zoomed out, there is a chance more than one vehicle is in the pic, however, I was unsuccessful..LOL

[ÜberFly]

"The Commissionaires"are the contractor and all photo radar operators are Peace Officers (can legally issue tickets)...

The reviewers would have similar appointments.

Photo enforcement was privatized long ago. One of their ( sub-contracted firm awarded the contract) employees is responsible for viewing the infractions before issuance. Not aware of any sworn police officers employed in this capacity any longer.

[C2C3PO]

Yes - they are not sworn police officers.

[Ken3134]

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is yes, supposedly all tickets are reviewed before they are sent. Or at least that’s what was explained to me. It’s been a few years since I had one of those! Better to get them in the mail than in person I always say! The in person ones add demerit points.

[elkhunter11]

The person reviewing the photos, is supposed to check to make sure that only one vehicle is in the picture, but some do slip through with multiple vehicles. And you also want to verify the speed limit at the location listed on the ticket, a friend was issued a ticket for doing 100 in a 70 zone, but when the location was verified, the picture was taken in a 100 zone. And no, the person operating the photo radar, and reviewing the pictures is typically not a police officer.

[does it ALL outdoors]

Years ago I went to the courthouse to view the photo in it's entiriety because if zoomed out, there is a chance more than one vehicle is in the pic, however, I was unsuccessful..LOL

Had a buddy try and fight a photo radar once due too two cars being side by side in the pic, he got a quick education on how the technology works, and how accurate it is. He had to pay the whole tic, no discounts.

[elkhunter11]

Had a buddy try and fight a photo radar once due too two cars being side by side in the pic, he got a quick education on how the technology works, and how accurate it is. He had to pay the whole tic, no discounts.

So who gave him the education? If two vehicles are in the beam at the same time, the unit will give one reading, and you can't be 100% certain which vehicle the reading is for.

https://www.calgary.ca/cps/traffic/photo-radar.html

From that link.

If there is more than one vehicle in the photograph for photo radar infractions, the ticket will not be issued. With only one vehicle in the captured image there is no question regarding travel speed of the vehicle.

[Fish along]

And after feb 1st all you do is give them 50 bucks and someone will decide if it’s an error or not.

So with these new rules in place it would be safe to say that everyone who operates a vehicle will definitely get a ticket if they are causing a driving infraction?unless the radar is in error correct?

[Talking moose]

So with these new rules in place it would be safe to say that everyone who operates a vehicle will definitely get a ticket if they are causing a driving infraction?unless the radar is in error correct?

I’m not sure. The other thread going on has some of the answers.

[C2C3PO]

Elkhunter;

Fewer and fewer places use the actual photo radar only method of speed detection at static sites. Most have switched to multi-faceted devices referred to in the subsequent heading within the link you provided known as "intersection safety cameras". These ones use sensors cut into the roadway as well as scaled photography (to do distance over time) measurements and even radar as well.
There are quite a few different vendors all providing their technology to different municipalities - it is not a one-size-fits-all approach anymore.
The latter are all capable of distinguishing speeds of multiple vehicles in separate lanes......unless they're malfunctioning !
And they do malfunction from time to time.

[elkhunter11]

Elkhunter;

Fewer and fewer places use the actual photo radar only method of speed detection at static sites. Most have switched to multi-faceted devices referred to in the subsequent heading within the link you provided known as "intersection safety cameras". These ones use sensors cut into the roadway as well as scaled photography (to do distance over time) measurements and even radar as well.
There are quite a few different vendors all providing their technology to different municipalities - it is not a one-size-fits-all approach anymore.
The latter are all capable of distinguishing speeds of multiple vehicles in separate lanes......unless they're malfunctioning !
And they do malfunction from time to time.

Yes intersection cameras are much more advanced, but many jurisdictions still use the photo radar units mounted in vehicles, and those units still can't differentiate between vehicles. The person that I was replying to specified "photo radar" , so I replied with information that relates to what is commonly known as "photo radar".

[jednastka]

Just a note. Last year, I received a ticket for right turn on a red light without stopping. I reviewed the video multiple times, and decided that I just might be able to make a case that I stopped, and then went. It was a very, very short stop nonetheless. When I announced that I would go to court, they dropped the ticket right away, but not until I declared my intentions first.
Vic

[C2C3PO]

Fair enough , but the decision whether to issue a ticket or not (if there is more than one vehicle within the frame) depends on a multitude of reasons.
It appears Calgary does not do this but other jurisdictions do. For example in Edmonton operators were previously ( cant say for certain now) instructed to make detailed visual notes relating to these instances that would state whether vehicle in the #2 lane for example was overtaking vehicle in the #3 lane and this information was to be used in determining as well which was the offending vehicle. Also many units have multiple head radar antennae that are supposed to differentiate between the difference in speed between the transmitted and reflected bounce back times to the unit. This coupled with operators notes are supposed to allow them to differentiate between speeds of more than one vehicle.
There are so many new refinements in the ability to discern speeds between adjacent vehicles, but whether the administration chooses to simply not issue the summons may in the end be just a practical one due to the common belief out there that it simply cant be done and therefore avoid all the subsequent hassles that go with it.

[elkhunter11]

Fair enough , but the decision whether to issue a ticket or not (if there is more than one vehicle within the frame) depends on a multitude of reasons.
It appears Calgary does not do this but other jurisdictions do. For example in Edmonton operators were previously ( cant say for certain now) instructed to make detailed visual notes relating to these instances that would state whether vehicle in the #2 lane for example was overtaking vehicle in the #3 lane and this information was to be used in determining as well which was the offending vehicle. Also many units have multiple head radar antennae that are supposed to differentiate between the difference in speed between the transmitted and reflected bounce back times to the unit. This coupled with operators notes are supposed to allow them to differentiate between speeds of more than one vehicle.
There are so many new refinements in the ability to discern speeds between adjacent vehicles, but whether the administration chooses to simply not issue the summons may in the end be just a practical one due to the common belief out there that it simply cant be done and therefore avoid all the subsequent hassles that go with it.


Taking notes as to who they thought might have been overtaking, or who might have been slowing down , leaves room for error, and it sounds like Calgary simply wants to eliminate that possibility of error? It sounds like Calgary wants to be 100% sure whose speed they actually recorded, rather than being 80% sure or 90% sure. It's actually nice to see that they want to be as certain as possible, before issuing tickets.

[C2C3PO]

That is exactly it.
If the operators are doing their job the system should be foolproof and catch anomalies in equipment malfunctioning, etc. as well as bolster the readings the equipment gave.
If the operator is simply "checked out" and recllning in their seat and not observing or taking notes then they must resort to the basic default principle of one vehicle only in the frame.

[elkhunter11]

That is exactly it.
If the operators are doing their job the system should be foolproof and catch anomalies in equipment malfunctioning, etc. as well as bolster the readings the equipment gave.
If the operator is simply "checked out" and recllning in their seat and not observing or taking notes then they must resort to the basic default principle of one vehicle only in the frame.

And mistakes are even made with laser units, which can be aimed much more precisely that radar.

https://edmontonsun.com/2014/09/17/alberta-man-fights-photo-radar-ticket-and-wins

Through this disclosure, Deets got a copy of the original photo including the crosshairs indicating where the operator targeted the laser, and sure enough, it was pointed at the white truck passing him

It's just sad that the prosecution knew full well that the laser was pointed at the wrong vehicle and still took this to court.

[C2C3PO]

You will NOT get an argument from me on whether mistakes can be made or not.
They most certainly do. In those instances we need a system that allows people to go to court and have at least a reasonable chance of defending themselves against an intimidating system that is stacked in the favour of the Crown.
That is not so say that everyone who believes they were innocent are, but the fact that there are any at all is enough justification in my mind to safeguard the system we have instead of place more hurdles and fees in the way to make it even more difficult and punishing.
I apologize for derailing this thread.....

[elkhunter11]

Fair enough , but the decision whether to issue a ticket or not (if there is more than one vehicle within the frame) depends on a multitude of reasons.
It appears Calgary does not do this but other jurisdictions do. For example in Edmonton operators were previously ( cant say for certain now) instructed to make detailed visual notes relating to these instances that would state whether vehicle in the #2 lane for example was overtaking vehicle in the #3 lane and this information was to be used in determining as well which was the offending vehicle. Also many units have multiple head radar antennae that are supposed to differentiate between the difference in speed between the transmitted and reflected bounce back times to the unit. This coupled with operators notes are supposed to allow them to differentiate between speeds of more than one vehicle.
There are so many new refinements in the ability to discern speeds between adjacent vehicles, but whether the administration chooses to simply not issue the summons may in the end be just a practical one due to the common belief out there that it simply cant be done and therefore avoid all the subsequent hassles that go with it.

I agree on maintaining our right to a trial, because mistakes do get made.


As to the OP, this discussion did bring up some relevant information, as in was the ticket the result of a vehicle mounted photo radar unit, or an intersection camera? The odds of a mistake being made, are much higher with a vehicle mounted photo radar unit.

[sewerrat]

In Red Deer I got 2 tickets going through an intersection, one was for going through red, the other was for speeding. It was a costly gift, I learned my lesson.

https://www.reddeer.ca/city-services/police-rcmp/traffic-safety-and-enforcement/intersection-cameras/.

[Savage Bacon]

I guess there are more ways than one to dispute a ticket. 10 or so years ago in Mesa Arizona, right outside the gate of my parents place, a guy that got a photo radar ticket parked behind the photo radar vehicle, came up to the window, and shot the guy.

It was a private company monitoring people's speeds. I'm not sure how it works now but I don't think I ever see anyone in the vehicle.

Years ago when I lived in Calgary I think they were even using dummy recycling bins outfitted with radar cameras.

Sent from my SM-G970W using Tapatalk

[Phil McCracken]

I agree on maintaining our right to a trial, because mistakes do get made.


As to the OP, this discussion did bring up some relevant information, as in was the ticket the result of a vehicle mounted photo radar unit, or an intersection camera? The odds of a mistake being made, are much higher with a vehicle mounted photo radar unit.

Got numbers on that? Please share with us...:)

[elkhunter11]

Got numbers on that? Please share with us...:)

No I don't have numbers, but the technology is older, and there is possible human error associated with photo radar, that doesn't exist with intersection cameras. If you remove the human error, then you reduce the odds of errors. The link that I posted gives a good explanation of the difference, which is mainly that the intersection cameras are lane specific, while photo radar is not. And of course the intersection camera is stationary, so unlike photo radar, the operator shouldn't make a mistake as to the speed zone that the camera is located in, when pictures are taken.

[lyallpeder]

It's an automatic fine to the Registered owner unless it was determined to be issued in error ie a problem with the actual machine itself. If then it would likely not be sent out in the first place. Your only recourse is court or pay it early and they may reduce it.

They don’t do reductions by a JP anymore.

[mikefromcanmore]

I guess there are more ways than one to dispute a ticket. 10 or so years ago in Mesa Arizona, right outside the gate of my parents place, a guy that got a photo radar ticket parked behind the photo radar vehicle, came up to the window, and shot the guy.

It was a private company monitoring people's speeds. I'm not sure how it works now but I don't think I ever see anyone in the vehicle.

Years ago when I lived in Calgary I think they were even using dummy recycling bins outfitted with radar cameras.

Sent from my SM-G970W using Tapatalk

Red Deer uses a Electrical Box's, easy to spot as they have handles and tires to allow for easy transport and placement. Mostly are used in School/Playgrounds zones were a 3/4 ton sticks out.