Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Query about red light fines

13»

Comments

  • #102
    bangkok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,638 ✭✭✭✭bangkok


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    FOI doesn't apply to Garda operational records, for obvious reasons. If you're not happy with his action, you can take the issue to GSOC anyway. It does look at bit suspect to me.



    Presumably a driver encountering a stuck red light should do the same and get out and push their car through to save the potential of a fine?

    You are not breaking the law if you get off the bike and walk through a red light


  • #103
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,327 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    magicbastarder wrote: »
    who is this Mr Bean chap people repeatedly refer to? is he a professional cyclist?

    He is indeed...

    giphy.gif


  • #104
    Wishbone Ash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,011 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash


    Irishphotodesk wrote: »
    ... but technically within the law ...
    What do you mean by 'technically within the law'? There's nothing technical about it. It's perfectly legal.


  • #105
    Eamonnator
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭Eamonnator


    Irishphotodesk wrote: »
    This is exactly what happens.... Motorists are faced with multiple offences, it has happened after road traffic incidents, more often than not the DPP will direct that the larger offence is the one to charge the person with, sometimes if they plead to an offence the lesser matter will be taken into consideration.

    With regards to the offences mentioned.... Is without due care and consideration a separate crime to breaking a red light .... In my opinion... Yes, it is a separate offence and one is not always dependent on the other.

    Maybe I should add that I have been working around the legal/judicial system for almost 20years.

    Its a pity poor aul St1mpMeister wasn't given this option.


  • #106
    07Lapierre
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,255 ✭✭✭07Lapierre


    bangkok wrote: »
    Why dont they crack down on the drug pushers who are all over the city centre who are actually harming other people.

    Why doesnt the same guard call to the house of john delaney and arrest for fraud.

    Fining a cyclist going about his business and taking care on the road (even going through a red) is a joke imo

    The flip side to that argument is if cyclists didn’t break the law, the Gardai would be free to go after real criminals! ;)


  • #107
    Irishphotodesk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,896 ✭✭✭Irishphotodesk


    Eamonnator wrote: »
    Its a pity poor aul St1mpMeister wasn't given this option.

    I don’t think any person who commits a crime can choose what they are charged with, that’s down to the legal system.

    If the matter is referred to the DPP it’s a little more serious than an on the spot fine.

    If he opted for the court option he would have the opportunity to argue his point before a judge....with the correct legal advice he could get off with a warning or the second matter taken into consideration, all depends on his legals and the judge of the day.


  • #108
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,805 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    I must say, we're treating the Garda as if he actually knows what he's doing, while we also know that he's telling the OP that not wearing a helmet is "an offence".

    In fact, it's even possible the Garda threw in the second fine because he couldn't find the fine for not wearing a helmet. They threw the "without reasonable consideration" fine in with the specific fines as a "miscellaneous", as Paschal Donohoe more or less admitted when asked about fining cyclists for using a mobile phone.

    EDIT: looking back at the first post, the Garda specifically says breaking a red light automatically means cycling without reasonable consideration.


  • #109
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,805 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Irishphotodesk wrote: »
    Maybe I should add that I have been working around the legal/judicial system for almost 20years.

    This is equivalent to the "Scientist here ..." thing on Twitter. One of the posters in this thread used to be a Garda, which they didn't bring up, but they thought giving the two fines was an odd thing to do, which I would take as a reasonable indicator that it probably isn't a fair and proportionate use of the fine (as opposed to a permissible use of the fine in theory, given the right judge in court if challenged).

    Not saying anything you've said is wrong -- I'm pretty sure in theory it's all correct, and I'm not a person who is in any way qualified in law anyway -- but nobody seems to have heard of someone getting the "misc." fine on top of a specific fine without breaking another specific law. It IS unusual, and it doesn't sound as if the OP was doing anything other than the lower end of common-or-garden light breaking. And the Garda, according to the OP, explained the second fine by saying "you went through a red light so no consideration for others". Being fined twice for *exactly* the same offence seems (the Garda doesn't appear to have suggested that it was an outrageous example of light breaking, but that breaking a light is inherently showing a lack of consideration for others), on the basis of what other people are saying of their experience of fines, unorthodox.

    I had a look at IrishCycle.com's archives and stuff posted on Twitter, and the "without reasonable consideration" fine seems to be used mostly for people cycling the wrong way and cycling on the footpath: that is, things that are illegal but have no specific FCN associated with them.


  • #110
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,805 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Every early mention of the "without reasonable consideration" FCN implies it was a way to be able to fine the more egregious examples of footpath cycling without having a specific FCN for all footpath cycling.

    E.g. https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/cyclists-who-use-footpaths-will-not-be-fined-31342974.html

    Anyway, I don't want to be arguing with people who, unlike me, do have knowledge of this area. I do think the fine is not being used as intended here, but maybe there's nothing to stop that from happening, bar going to court and a judge saying it's an unreasonable use of the catch-all fine.


  • #111
    St1mpMeister
    Registered Users Posts: 509 ✭✭✭St1mpMeister


    So according to that, it is legal to turn left on red by mounting the pavement at the corner.

    Madness. Just make a left on red legal if they're going that route.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,035 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    It is legal in quite a lot of jurisdictions.


  • #113
    St1mpMeister
    Registered Users Posts: 509 ✭✭✭St1mpMeister


    Stark wrote: »
    It is legal in quite a lot of jurisdictions.

    Yeah but not here where apparently it IS legal to take a 1m detour over the corner of the pavement instead


  • #114
    Eamonnator
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭Eamonnator


    St1mpMeister wrote: »
    Yeah but not here where apparently it IS legal to take a 1m detour over the corner of the pavement instead

    But, you have to get off your bike, walk around the corner on the path and remount, when you get around the corner.


  • #115
    AulWan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,653 ✭✭✭AulWan


    St1mpMeister wrote: »
    I've paid both fines as it would have cost me more than €40 to spend a day in court, but I've also made a Freedom of Information request to get the Garda's report to see exactly how he justified the double fine.

    If there are blatant falsehoods in the report then I'll take it up with the Ombudsman.

    I won't get the €40 back, but it might deter him from being so free with handing out fines if he doesn't want further hassle, but it will also be interesting to see if he refers to the fact I "didn't have a helmet" as one of the offences (at the time he said this was an offence while I was on the Dublin Bike)

    Anyway, I paid €40, I might as well get something out of it.

    Pathetic.

    As if the Gardai or the Ombudsman have time to be dealing with this sort of rubbish.


  • #116
    Kaisr Sose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,260 ✭✭✭Kaisr Sose


    AulWan wrote: »
    Pathetic.

    As if the Gardai or the Ombudsman have time to be dealing with this sort of rubbish.

    OP is entitled to raise the conduct or act of any Garda with GSOC. They did say they tried to communicate with the issuing Garda but they were not interested. Its minor stuff, suey the Garda could offer more information on the basis for a dual summons for the same offence?

    You are right to say it's pathetic. Some Garda are exactly that.

    There are Garda, some at high levels in the force, that have not got a clue about many of the laws that they are empowered to enforce, and attempt to remain unanswerable for their actions. This is wrong.

    The arrogance or indifference shown by them is shocking. If you dare question their decesions or acts they just ignore you..its an abuse of power and is what GSOC are empowered to investigate. The Garda the OP encountered may be one of these types and if I was the OP I would demand they explain their decision making here. If it stacks up fine, but failing to explain it stinks.

    I am still waiting for the big shake up in the whole culture.


  • #117
    Limestone1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 856 ✭✭✭Limestone1


    07Lapierre wrote: »
    The flip side to that argument is if cyclists didn’t break the law, the Gardai would be free to go after real criminals! ;)


    No , they are free to go after real criminals ............cyclists are not preventing this


  • #118
    RobbieMD
    Registered Users Posts: 449 ✭✭RobbieMD


    Limestone1 wrote: »
    No , they are free to go after real criminals ............cyclists are not preventing this

    The question then is who is the arbiter of what a “real criminal” is.


  • #119
    St1mpMeister
    Registered Users Posts: 509 ✭✭✭St1mpMeister


    Eamonnator wrote: »
    But, you have to get off your bike, walk around the corner on the path and remount, when you get around the corner.

    Apparently not, you can ride on the pavement according to that article, i.e mount pavement before reaching lights, ride around corner and then rejoin road once clear

    Not saying I'd do this, just showing the hypocrisy in the rules.


  • #120
    Eamonnator
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,561 ✭✭✭Eamonnator


    St1mpMeister wrote: »
    Apparently not, you can ride on the pavement according to that article, i.e mount pavement before reaching lights, ride around corner and then rejoin road once clear

    Not saying I'd do this, just showing the hypocrisy in the rules.

    No, it is an offence to cycle on the footpath, but cycling on the footpath is not one of the specific offences, for which a fine on the spot can be issued.
    Ironically, this is one of the offences, that could come under the umbrella of "without reasonable consideration"


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    St1mpMeister
    Registered Users Posts: 509 ✭✭✭St1mpMeister


    Eamonnator wrote: »
    No, it is an offence to cycle on the footpath, but cycling on the footpath is not one of the specific offences, for which a fine on the spot can be issued.

    Eamonnator wrote: »
    Ironically, this is one of the offences, that could come under the umbrella of "without reasonable consideration"

    hmm don't those two conflict?

    So it IS an on the spot fine then, as "Riding without reasonable consideration" is an available NFC


  • #122
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,805 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    St1mpMeister wrote: »
    hmm don't those two conflict?

    So it IS an on the spot fine then, as "Riding without reasonable consideration" is an available NFC

    As I said, all the early talk of that particular FCN was around its use for punishing illegal actions that fell into asshole territory, rather than creating FCNs for some behaviours that are technically illegal but sometimes benign, such as parents and children cycling to school together on the footpath.


Advertisement