You have a letter from your employer confirming he expected you to test the vehicle. On the balance of probabilities that's what you were doing, even if you collected parts at the same time.
Not that it seems to matter. By any measure you were involved in the servicing of the vehicle, and you told the cop that from the start.
If the cop said in court "You claimed you were getting parts" an entirely accurate response would be "yes, I was serving the vehicle and it needed parts"
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 3:10pm
Thank you someone has read the legislation link lol. Do I need to plead guilty to have my reasons heard
cammey,
Jun 15, 3:10pm
The cops like you to make a submission to them, that admits liability. Then if they decide to give you a boot, you have already lost any potential court action.
You are best just to be polite, and say you are not guilty, and you will see them in court. You can also ask for a copy of the policemans notes, and any evidence they intend to use in court.
Just ask them for "full disclosure". They are obligated to provide it.
Whatever you do, don't let them fool you into pleading guilty, or admitting guilt at any time.
In fact you don't need to discuss it with the police at all.
The moment they pulled you over, your only obligation was to provide your details, and a driver licence. No discussion required. (Or advised.)
gunhand,
Jun 15, 3:16pm
First response in any traffic event, in fact any legal matter, is to NOT admit anything at all to anyone, until you have consulted a lawyer in due course. Especially if you intend to defend. You just have to be honest with yourself with what you were knowingly (thought) doing at the time. But hell yea, as per your rights, defend it. May cost you more in time and effort but its your right. You are lucky to live in a country where you can defend such things. They even give you all the info how to. Geez ive, and I bet many, drive off while clicking the belt. But I also reckon you have good case for getting off, it's just you may have put ya foot in it initially a little bit. Just say you didn't explain yourself correctly to the officer what was happening.
msigg,
Jun 15, 3:17pm
bigfatmat1 why don't you ask your boss, he seems to have all the answers.
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 3:18pm
The full disclosure was included with court summons its posted above
cammey,
Jun 15, 3:21pm
I must be going blind. I can't see the police disclosure. I can only see they wrote you a ticket, saying what they alleged.
Can you repost for me ?
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 3:22pm
really ? has nothing to do with him He just supplied a letter which I attached to my defence. If you nothing valuable to contribute. Go find another thread to be unconstructive in
cammey,
Jun 15, 3:26pm
Ahh yes, I see. Sounds like more a summary than full disclosure. In my experience they normally waffle on about what you said and where they were parked etc.
Your "admission" is not of any concern. You admitted doing something you are allowed to do IMHO.
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 3:30pm
Should I seek legal representation. Not really concerned about cost. More the fact for getting a ticket which I believe I should not of got.
msigg,
Jun 15, 3:33pm
Sounds like the only thing you want to hear is that you are right?. Let the court decide.I think you know the answer deep down.
cammey,
Jun 15, 3:36pm
Well, that's up to you. I have always done it myself. Quite enjoy it actually.
And I have always found the courts helpful, and not at all pro police.
In fact, I had one case where the judge more or less told the cop he was an idiot.
(I stopped at red lights in the early hours of the morning, and they failed to change, as they didn't detect my motorcycle. After a minute or so, I carefully checked for traffic, and rode on, only to get a ticket. I defended it on the basis that the lights were designed to detect vehicles, and had not done so. Therefore they were faulty due to mal-adjustment, and I was entitled to proceed when safe. Judge agreed entirely and told the cop he was wasting everyones time.)
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 3:37pm
Piss off if you have nothing to offer. I KNOW I AM RIGHT! the thread is not about wheather I should of got a ticket or not . CAN YOU NOT READ AS WELL AS ONLY OFFER STUPID NON CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS!
msigg,
Jun 15, 3:43pm
Yea fair call, although your profile does say Lawyer, so you should know the answer if anyone does.
cammey,
Jun 15, 3:45pm
To be frank, the police break the rules all the time.
Not just 5 seconds without a set belt type offences, but they regularly conduct illegal searches, subject people to illegal detention, and generally think that they can make NZ a police state, just by pretending it already is a police state.
I think, that everyone when dealing with the police, should be polite, professional and behave well, even though the police may not. They should also never hesitate to record everything, especially if it can be done without the police knowing.
But most importantly, every time they get it wrong, or in fact its even a matter of opinion, get the courts to provide the opinion.
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 4:00pm
I am a auto electrician
marcos1,
Jun 15, 4:12pm
Really? I believe the laws of physics would disagree with you.
cammey,
Jun 15, 4:14pm
Biggest killer in car accidents is head injuries. No reason you cant wear a helmet in the car if you want.
Who has their hand up for that ?
bumfacingdown,
Jun 15, 4:19pm
Might be hard to defend "under m401 it says admits offence it says "yes""
bigfatmat1,
Jun 15, 4:30pm
I never admitted liability unsure why this is here. I stated i was wearing it blah blah.
tamarillo,
Jun 15, 4:35pm
Op, you're asking why you should have to plead guilty. Well you don't. Simple. The bit about it saying 'yes' under the question 'admits offence' is a different thing. That's merely saying you admitted you weren't wearing a seat belt at the time you were observed. You can still plead not guilty and have your day in court to explain that you felt you had the right to not wear it whilst backing out and show the legislation. I don't get why you seem to object to that, surely if your going to plead not guilty it should go to court as they've made a decision to proceed. Personally I wouldn't go with all the testing and servicing bit as that way to unclear and you'd need someone to look in to case law around that to establish whether picking up parts has been found to be allowed as servicing in a court of law. And that's expensive. And testing? Nope. You said no and the only reason you were in that exact spot was to get parts. You can't claim you went down this driveway to test it. Forget that mate. So, of you're sure that the exact time you were seen was part of the reversing procedure, and you can nail the cop down to agreeing with that, that might be good arguement. But if they can say that you had stopped reversing by then, and were now heading forward in car on road, you won't get away with this IMO. As for why you got a ticket, remember the local cop isn't a lawyer and only knows the basic rules, and regrettably out police give no leeway of allowance with traffic laws. So, if your sure you were observed whilst reversing, you can plead not guilty IMO.
nightsky1,
Jun 15, 4:39pm
The ticket says. "fails to wear seat belt. "
You were not wearing your seatbelt.
what part of that do you struggle with
pay up ka Ching.
gunhand,
Jun 16, 3:05am
Our Police do have leeway with traffic offenses if they so choose. They do indeed let people off with many an offense, i:e they may fine you for no WOF but let you off on lapsed license if you get it sorted. Some even drop the KMs over the limit to lower the fine. And some even let you off with an offense that should see you in jail and loss of vehicle. But there will be days that a NO tolerance on a particular offense may be in play. They do use discretion all the time but you only hear of the ones they don't of course.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.