Query about red light fines

St1mpMeister

I went through a red-light at a quiet left-turn junction around 11.30pm.

Yes I know I'm worse than Hitler, but I had made sure no traffic/pedestrians were approaching as otherwise I wouldn't have done it, and made sure I had observed no traffic would be affected.

Anyway, I was nabbed by a Garda and given two fines:

"Cycling Past a Red Light" and "Riding PedalCycle without Reasonable Consideration"


The first I agree with, but when I contested the second one the response was "you went through a red light so no consideration for others".

Is it a given that you will always get 2 fines? Why not just have one fine for €80??

1hnr79jr65

You committed 2 offences in the maneuver of cycling through a red light.

1. "Cycling past a red light" - first offence, pretty obvious and you accept this one.
2. "Riding pedal cycle without reasonable consideration" - second offence, this is charged due to nature of your action and effect it could have on another road user, pedestrian or yourself. Regardless if there was someone there to affect of not, this could be applied on the basis of you or another could have had an accident by your careless action, potentially resulting in emergency services/clean up/road safety crew being deployed.

On the second offence for a motorist would generally be applied where a red light is broken, "Running red light" & "failure to drive with due care and attention" or similar.

Also in the case of the charges if you failed to pay for 1 or both of the fines a warrant could be issued for you to appear in court, increased fines or if you wanted to dispute 1 or both fines.

St1mpMeister

So it's a given that the latter fine will always be given when the first is given?

What you seem to suggest is that the first fine is not sufficient enough on its own as the latter offence will implicitly be committed.

Are most motoring fines doubled-up like this as well?

magicbastarder

Surely the second fine is implicit in the first? Sounds like they're claiming one offence is actually two offences.

sbs2010

In this case I think you'd have a chance of successfully contesting the second charge.

The first is a black and white issue but you did take care and consideration by noting there was no one around.

Surely the second one is for those who fly through without taking any care at all.

Eamonnator

I cannot for the life of me understand, why two tickets were issued for the same offence.
In my own experience, the closest to this was, back in the day, if we caught a driver, from outside this jurisdiction, exceeding the speed limit by a great margin, we would arrest him for dangerous driving (there is no power of arrest for speeding) and charge him with dangerous driving AND exceeding the speed limit.
Driver would then be released on money bail to appear at next sitting of local court. If the driver appeared for court, it would then be up to the judge which offence to convict on. I have never seen a judge convicting on both counts. If there was no other offence, the judge would invariably convict on the speeding charge. If the driver failed to appear, the judge would usually convict in his absence and fine the driver the bail amount, payable forthwith.
It appears to me, that you are being punished twice for one offence.

BDI

Either the guards should have more to be doing or you pissed him off.

Surely there is more to this story, I’d just cycle off if it was me but the guards never stopped me on my bike.

Guffy

How careful could you have been if you didn't see the garda?

Stark

Seemed to be quite a few jobsworths around yesterday evening.

Got caught at a light yesterday was having sequence issues. As in myself and a few others stopped at it, waited through 4-5 full cycles and no green for us. Guard standing there just stared us out of it the whole time as if daring us to proceed through. Eventually we had to get off our bikes and walk the bikes around the light on the footpath to get past with him throwing us a filthy look. The non-asshole thing to do would be to help wave us through when there were gaps in the traffic when it became clear there was a problem with the lights.

Eamonnator

It was always my understanding, that riding a pedal cycle without reasonable consideration was to cover any offences not specifically covered by the fines on the spot.

tuxy

Stark wrote: »

Seemed to be quite a few jobsworths around yesterday evening.

Operation Free-Flow started on Monday involving 150 new Garda recruits straight out of Templemore. The exact same thing was run over the Christmas period last year, expect anything but free flowing traffic.

St1mpMeister

Guffy wrote: »

How careful could you have been if you didn't see the garda?

Was waiting for this one

I saw two lanes of cars with bright lights. They were stopped at red too. One was white, but the lights obscured me seeing the markings.

Anyway back on point... Yes the guard seemed to have a chip on his shoulder and even said "...and you're not even wearing a helmet" (I was on a Dublin Bike)

To be honest I'm not bothered going to court. I attempted to get it cancelled but it's up to the guard to sign off on it and he declined it.

My time is worth more than arguing over €40, but the double charge definitely left a sour taste in my mouth.

Kaisr Sose

I am sorry to say this OP but it's nice to see a fine given for passing a red light. Unfortunately, a cyclist passing one is deemed the same as a motor vehicle (in law) but perhaps not outcome (endangering others).

I would agree that two offences for the same act is excessive. Many motorists just get a fine and points for running a red. It only gets elevated up to without due care and attention if/where there are other factors.

I don't think they can prosecute that. They have to prove you acted without consideration for others. I suppose the could say they deemed it so but is that enough? Given AGS are all about the weight of evidence, the same holds for them. In court. It woukd get down to your word against theirs, and they are deemed to be impartial, just recounting the facts.

You could contact the station and try and get the second one voided. Edit: See you tried that. Seems a bit stubborn! Two convictions for the same act? Come on!

plodder

St1mpMeister wrote: »

I went through a red-light at a quiet left-turn junction around 11.30pm.

Yes I know I'm worse than Hitler, but I had made sure no traffic/pedestrians were approaching as otherwise I wouldn't have done it, and made sure I had observed no traffic would be affected.

Anyway, I was nabbed by a Garda and given two fines:

"Cycling Past a Red Light" and "Riding PedalCycle without Reasonable Consideration"


The first I agree with, but when I contested the second one the response was "you went through a red light so no consideration for others".

Is it a given that you will always get 2 fines? Why not just have one fine for €80??

Assuming you didn't piss him off with your reaction, I can imagine this happening because enforcement is so patchy and inconsistent that they feel they have to maximise the return for the little effort that is put in. It's sad really.

NSAman

About time some of these cyclists got fined. Pay up and just accept you are a bad road user!

Kaisr Sose

NSAman wrote: »

About time some of these cyclists got fined. Pay up and just accept you are a bad road user!

Its not about 'these cyclists' aka cyclist bashing. This is a cycling forum so it would be good if you did not use such language.

For the record, all categories of road users are frequently ignoring red lights. The poster actually said they accept the fine for passing the red.

NSAman

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Its not about 'these cyclists' aka cyclist bashing. This is a cycling forum so it would be good if you did not use such language.

For the record, all categories of road users are frequently ignoring red lights. The poster actually said they accept the fine for passing the red.

So I should hope so.

Cannot abide those who break red lights in any mode of transport. Cycling is dangerous enough without cyclists breaking lights.

AulWan

Maybe the garda saw something you didn't see?

Did you see him?

St1mpMeister

plodder wrote: »

Assuming you didn't piss him off with your reaction

I think that's what gets me, is that they can decide to up the ante and double-charge if they feel so inclined, and the only person you can appeal to is the garda himself (you can't even appeal to the super intendent apparently).

It's either try to convince the garda to change his mind, or risk it in court.

I would have assumed that they would keep personal feelings out when making a determination of the punishment and they just apply a specific fine for a specific act, not add in extra fines if they are feeling in the mood.

zubair

If a second fine is the difference between you probably not doing it again and definitely not, then well done guard.

bilbot79

Pure stupid that

1hnr79jr65

magicbastarder wrote: »

Surely the second fine is implicit in the first? Sounds like they're claiming one offence is actually two offences.

It is cause and effect. 2 separate offences out of the 1 action. First offence was breaking a traffic law, second offence would basically be self or pedestrian/motorist endangerment.

The second offence would be based on the determination of the Garda from their perception of the illegal action taken, in effect a judgement call on potential risks.

In all likelihood the total fines received should be just paid without contest, if they were to be disputed there is a reasonable probability that the fines could increase if challenged in court on top of solicitor fees.

bilbot79

I actually think that the second charge was unfair. Yes he broke the light but the subsequent endangerment of others depends on how reckless it's done. The OP was careful so it didn't count

Wishbone Ash

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

....The second offence would be based on the determination of the Garda from their perception of the illegal action taken, in effect a judgement call on potential risks.....

Garda discretion is usually used the opposite way, not to add to the initial offence.

If a vehicle is parked on double yellow lines and with wheels on a footpath, the owner isn't issued with two fines. The standard practice is the proceed with the main offence.

AulWan

bilbot79 wrote: »

I actually think that the second charge was unfair. Yes he broke the light but the subsequent endangerment of others depends on how reckless it's done. The OP was careful so it didn't count

Breaking the law always counts.

The OP posted that he looked and saw no traffic or pedestrians, yet susequently posted his vision was obscured by bright lights from cars at the traffic lights.

Its not unreasonable to wonder if the Garda saw something he didn't that made him decide the second fine was warranted.

Wishbone Ash

AulWan wrote: »

... yet susequently posted his vision was obscured by bright lights from cars at the traffic lights....

You're overthinking it. Just because he didn't realise that it was a Garda car, doesn't mean his vision was obscured. After all, he wasn't looking out for a Garda car. If I'm cycling at night and I meet a car. I can't normally tell what make and model it is as I just see the headlights. That doesn't mean I'm unaware of it.

AulWan wrote:

...Its not unreasonable to wonder if the Garda saw something he didn't that warranted the second fine.

It's not unreasonable to wonder if the Garda saw soft target? I regularly see motorists behaving illegally under the noses of Gardai but they rarely seem interested.

AulWan

St1mpMeister wrote: »

I saw two lanes of cars with bright lights. They were stopped at red too. One was white, but the lights obscured me seeing the markings.

Eh, he actually posted that his vision was obscured by the lights.

Enough that he didn't notice a Garda car, and still went through the red light.

But whatever.

Suck it up and pay the fines. Next time, don't break the lights.

St1mpMeister

AulWan wrote: »

Eh, he actually posted that his vision was obscured by the lights.

My vision wasn't obscured by lights. I saw parked cars to the right side junction with lights. The cars weren't in front of me, they were to my right about 10m away, my vision wasn't obscured.

Anyway back on topic, is it possible to request the Garda's account under freedom of information, or does it just remain a mystery until it goes to court?

I'm legitimately curious what he saw was a "double offendable" act considering I see countless cars/bikes going through red lights daily without a care.

I saw 2 Guards on bikes going through red lights about 6 months ago and even jokingly took them up on it.

I'll keep the receipt for the payment so that WHEN (not if) it becomes legal here to turn left on red (as it is with most other developed nations) I might be able to appeal for a refund :pac:

Wishbone Ash

St1mpMeister wrote: »

...I saw 2 Guards on bikes going through red lights about 6 months ago and even jokingly took them up on it...

Gardai are exempt from almost all traffic regulations in the course of their duties.

St1mpMeister

St1mpMeister wrote: »

Anyway back on topic, is it possible to request the Garda's account under freedom of information, or does it just remain a mystery until it goes to court?

https://www.garda.ie/en/Information-Centre/Freedom-of-Information/

I'll give this a shot.. even if it's just to indicate what sort of action triggered alarm bells as I doubt it would arrive before the fine payment due date.

AulWan

St1mpMeister wrote: »

I saw two lanes of cars with bright lights. They were stopped at red too. One was white, but the lights obscured me seeing the markings.

St1mpMeister wrote: »

My vision wasn't obscured by lights. I saw parked cars to the right side junction with lights. The cars weren't in front of me, they were to my right about 10m away, my vision wasn't obscured.

The second quote is a direct contradiction of the first. I didn't make this up, you posted it.

Stop moaning because you were caught.

Stark

He's not moaning because he was caught, he's complaining because he was issued two fines for the same offence.

Eamonnator

St1mpMeister wrote: »

My vision wasn't obscured by lights. I saw parked cars to the right side junction with lights. The cars weren't in front of me, they were to my right about 10m away, my vision wasn't obscured.

Anyway back on topic, is it possible to request the Garda's account under freedom of information, or does it just remain a mystery until it goes to court?

I'm legitimately curious what he saw was a "double offendable" act considering I see countless cars/bikes going through red lights daily without a care.

I saw 2 Guards on bikes going through red lights about 6 months ago and even jokingly took them up on it.

I'll keep the receipt for the payment so that WHEN (not if) it becomes legal here to turn left on red (as it is with most other developed nations) I might be able to appeal for a refund :pac:

I have no doubt, that if you don't pay the fines and attend court, when you are summoned, the judge will not convict you on the two counts. Despite the arguments put forward here, I still think, there was only one offence.
Problem is, you will lose a day.
Regarding the two Gardai going through red lights, no offence is committed by doing so. Gardai on duty are exempt from that and other regulations(parking and speeding come to mind), however they are not exempt from the dangerous/careless etc. driving laws.

St1mpMeister

AulWan wrote: »

The second quote is a direct contradiction of the first. I didn't make this up, you posted it.

name checks out

St1mpMeister

Eamonnator wrote: »

I have no doubt, that if you don't pay the fines and attend court, when you are summoned, the judge will not convict you on the two counts. Despite the arguments put forward here, I still think, there was only one offence.
Problem is, you will lose a day.

yeah pretty much. If the fine was €200 or something higher I might take it up, but honestly it's not worth my time for €40, though I still do want to understand the justification so that I can see it from their side.

plodder

St1mpMeister wrote: »

yeah pretty much. If the fine was €200 or something higher I might take it up, but honestly it's not worth my time for €40, though I still do want to understand the justification so that I can see it from their side.

Even if the judge dismisses the second charge, you'll be hit with a fine of at least 60 on the first count, and maybe higher, and a conviction, which you avoid if you pay the fixed penalty. Not sure it would be worth it.

Eamonnator

plodder wrote: »

Even if the judge dismisses the second charge, you'll be hit with a fine of at least 60 on the first count, and maybe higher, and a conviction, which you avoid if you pay the fixed penalty. Not sure it would be worth it.

Not necessarily so. The judge has discretion in the matter. Each case is judged on it's merits.

mattser

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

You're overthinking it. Just because he didn't realise that it was a Garda car, doesn't mean his vision was obscured. After all, he wasn't looking out for a Garda car. If I'm cycling at night and I meet a car. I can't normally tell what make and model it is as I just see the headlights. That doesn't mean I'm unaware of it.

It's not unreasonable to wonder if the Garda saw soft target? I regularly see motorists behaving illegally under the noses of Gardai but they rarely seem interested.

Guards doing their job................Guards wrong
Guards not doing their job...........Guards wrong

plodder

Eamonnator wrote: »

Not necessarily so. The judge has discretion in the matter. Each case is judged on it's merits.

True, but the fixed penalty has already increased by 50% to 60 by the time it gets to court. So, it would be very strange if a judge reduced the fine for someone who was accepting they were guilty.

St1mpMeister

plodder wrote: »

Even if the judge dismisses the second charge, you'll be hit with a fine of at least 60 on the first count, and maybe higher, and a conviction, which you avoid if you pay the fixed penalty. Not sure it would be worth it.

well a bit late for that, the red light fine has been paid because, well, there was no question about it

The other fine is the one pending payment.

tomasrojo

There's a mention of the "without reasonable consideration" FPN here:

There’s a limited amount of court reports available online referring to the offence of cycling without reasonable consideration, but the offence seems to generally relate to when more than one potentially action without reasonable consideration is carried out. For example: Last month a man from Terenure was reportedly found to be cycling without reasonable consideration after he cycled past a red light, without looking left or right, and whilst taking on a phone. In Galway in 2008 another man was convicted under this offence for cycling the wrong way off the roundabout and hitting a taxi.

https://irishcycle.com/2015/07/19/cycling-fines-what-you-need-to-know-from-august-1/

I guess if there weren't a specific red-light-breaking FPN, it would be reasonable to issue a "without reasonable consideration" FPN, but issuing both seems pretty irregular.

sy_flembeck

Stark wrote: »

Seemed to be quite a few jobsworths around yesterday evening.

I find this hilarious. Go over to the 'Near Misses' thread and apparently the Guards are doing nothing but when they do actually do their job they are seemingly jobsworths. No winning for them really

tomasrojo

As mentioned at that link, there were originally 15 FPNs proposed. I think the gardaí also wanted to be able to issue them for not using cycle tracks where provided but ran into the problem, like the non-helmet-wearing non-existent offence that so exercised the guard in this thread, that it wasn't illegal. Which seems to have started them on a Bill Barr-like quixotic run to prove that the legislation that made cycle tracks optional never really happened.

Anyway, I think the the "without reasonable consideration" FPN is to cover the more egregious cases of the eight FPNs that didn't make the cut.

tomasrojo

sy_flembeck wrote: »

I find this hilarious. Go over to the 'Near Misses' thread and apparently the Guards are doing nothing but when they do actually do their job they are seemingly jobsworths. No winning for them really

There is a difference between putting yourself in a risky situation and passing someone else at speed in a multi-tonne vehicle with centimetres to spare.

People shouldn't break red lights, and the OP accepts he shouldn't have done it. From the way he describes it, it wasn't outrageously dangerous to himself or others, but it's unambiguously illegal.

magicbastarder

sy_flembeck wrote: »

I find this hilarious. Go over to the 'Near Misses' thread and apparently the Guards are doing nothing but when they do actually do their job they are seemingly jobsworths. No winning for them really

the issue is that in this case, the garda did his job. but he overdid his job. it's like being charged for murder *and* manslaughter of the same person.

droidus

Just dont pay it. Thousands of drivers are constantly getting off without paying FPNs and aren't even summoned. Those that do end up in court just claim they never got the letter.

If you do end up having to go to court I seriously doubt the guard will even show up.

Meanwhile, during my commutes this week I saw 53 cars break solid red lights, another 46 break amber lights and 119 drivers using phones whilst driving.

tuxy

droidus wrote: »

If you do end up having to go to court I seriously doubt the guard will even show up.

I wouldn't bet on that, if he has been busy he may have several cases in the court that day so would be there,

Time

Stark wrote: »

He's not moaning because he was caught, he's complaining because he was issued two fines for the same offence.

Theres a difference between two actions and two offences, one action can break multiple laws and it's very common to have multiple charges arise from a single incident.

tomasrojo

But there is only one offence. This isn't like being intoxicated and urinating in a public place, which are two separate offences. The logic seems to be that the OP broke a red light and thereby acted in an inconsiderate manner. But that's why breaking the light is an offence in the first place. It's one offence.

Donald Trump

sbs2010 wrote: »

In this case I think you'd have a chance of successfully contesting the second charge.

The first is a black and white issue but you did take care and consideration by noting there was no one around.

Surely the second one is for those who fly through without taking any care at all.

Contest the first one too. Just tell the judge you wouldn't have even broken the red light if you weren't twisted drunk after being on the beer all day

plodder

St1mpMeister wrote: »

well a bit late for that, the red light fine has been paid because, well, there was no question about it

The other fine is the one pending payment.

I'm not a lawyer so take this with a pinch of salt, but did they send two separate bills? If not, they might say you haven't satisfied the terms of the fixed penalty notice, if you don't pay the whole thing... just sayin.

The more I think about this, the more I think you should just pay it all and chalk it down to experience.