Jump to content

Traffic Offence saying I did an abrupt lane change can I appeal?


Sunnydays-006
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi. I would like to seek advice from fellow drivers here. I've recently received a traffic offence which says that I had changed lanes abruptly and therefore causing the car behind to brake to avoid collision. Thing is, I don't remember there's such an incident. I'm usually careful and signal/check before I change lane. There's no accident, damage nor harm. I'm now facing $150 fine and 6 demerits points. I've already appealed but it was unsuccessful. I called TP and apparently there was no video or photo to show the offence. Only a TP officer saw it. I'm feeling a bit wronged here as I sincerely don't recall such an event. The person on the phone says I can go to court and it will be the police officers word agst mine. I mean, I don't want to go to court, but if I'm to be charged, shouldn't there be some sort of hard evidence against me?

What else can I do? The TP says no point appealing again. Any advice?

The Traffic Police Officer's testimony in court is hard enough evidence!

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

well... i was initially told the same thing.... no pics... just say is modified

 

i think if the same thing happened to me as TS, i may go all out if i am very sure i am not in the wrong

 

in the first place, i think TP has to prove that it was his sudden lane change that caused the car behind to brake

 

we all drive so long we should know that there are some people that love to brake, maybe tired, maybe kiasee

Yeah I may go all out too, especially if I am filthy rich.

 

Moreover, “abrupt” is subjective. What is “abrupt” to the TP may not be to another TP.

 

Now, without evidence to judge, how in the world can they claim TS is guilty? Even with evidence, TS may also not be guilty as the offence may be interpreted differently by different people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe TS can well afford the $150 fine and 6 points. What he buay song is he cannot be convinced if he really indeed commit the offence, and even if he did, the charges needs to be upfront right there and then.

 

TP should discharge his duty honorably by stopping his car and ascertain the driver's particulars. Then school him on his mistakes before issuing the summon. But instead, he got a anonymous letter informing of his offence (or furnish another person's particulars) he has no recollection of!! - this to me is a half-F job done dishonorably in a very poor "deep seated cultural issue" surfacing in the police force.

  • Praise 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

When there is no hard evidence (video or photo) to prove that you committed an offence, in my opinion there should be no grounds to issue you a summon. The TP should have stopped you there and then to summon you as the incident had just happened if he is right behind. You would have remembered what happened and you would have taken the ticket willingly if you are guilty.

 

To receive the ticket after the incident, you would have forgotten what happened plus any videos you may have already has been overwritten by new footage.

 

To sentence someone guilty just based on words of another person without hard evidence, even if the person is a public officer, seems wrong to me. Isn’t the onus on the authority to provide sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty? Failing which the accused shall be deemed innocent.

 

I feel for you bro, this feeling sucks.

In the past, before video evidence, it has always been like this when the TP summon drivers.

This is a good thread - how to protect ourselves with video recording.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks bro, this is how I feel. I know it the TP and they have integrity in their words and all. But I felt quite wronged here and if they want to accuse me should at least show me some evidence. In today's age, maybe TP should look into mobile cameras etc to provide evidence if they want to accuse of any offence.

 

In 21st century $inkland, cameras are almost everywhere. TP should either summon u on the spot or provide video/camera evidence to prosecute u.

 

I think u should stand up for yourself. Stand firm if u really did not commit the offence.

Edited by Aaronlkl
  • Praise 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your inputs. I don't have any car cam and thus cannot prove my innocence or even review to see what happened. I've had a squeaky clean driving record and this 6 points is really bothering me, especially when I feel that it might not have happened, or blown out of perspective. I do appreciate some posters views that I might have a biased perspective. I'm just thinking that if you want to accuse me of murder, at least show me the body, not just shout 'murder murder'. Right now it's like having to suck it in even though I disagree with the accusation.

In this age of car cams or whatever cams, tp should provide evidence before they accuse of offence, or just summon on the spot. Now it's like pointing finger at me without hard evidence. I mean, you get a picture if you run red light, then there's no argument it didn't happen.

Using the word court repeatedly to 'warn' you to pay up, feels kinda of mafia.

[grin]  [grin]  [grin]

Edited by Kusje
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I may go all out too, especially if I am filthy rich.

 

Moreover, âabruptâ is subjective. What is âabruptâ to the TP may not be to another TP.

 

Now, without evidence to judge, how in the world can they claim TS is guilty? Even with evidence, TS may also not be guilty as the offence may be interpreted differently by different people.

I dun think they will go around asking how abrupt mean to each individual, as long as there is a jam brake mean abrupt liao.

 

Some can argue what if the car behind is 100 meter away but still jam brake? I guess the TP do use judgment that applies to most drivers and traffic conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dun think they will go around asking how abrupt mean to each individual, as long as there is a jam brake mean abrupt liao.

 

Some can argue what if the car behind is 100 meter away but still jam brake? I guess the TP do use judgment that applies to most drivers and traffic conditions.

Exactly what i mean. Look what you just typed out.

 

So many possibilities, matter of perception and judgment and also you “guess”. Which also means in the presence of a video, TS may not be guilty too depending on who is judging.

 

Worst thing, there is no evidence whatsoever. If it is me I will be utterly pissed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Singapore you are guilty unless proven innocent. Don't assume otherwise. You may not feel anything amiss but ask yourself, why would TP go to the trouble of taking down your plate no and make report, eat full full too free? Although i feel that they should at least inform you time and location of the offence. Most of the summon I have seen before do list location and time.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read the title alone, I thought maybe TS was reported by another driver with car cam. I must say that I'm pleasantly surprised that there isn't any video and this this a proactive summon by TP. This means that TP is still doing their jobs on the road and not passively waiting for drivers to submit report before they take action. For this I give a thumb up to TP.

 

However from the perspective of TS, I must say that it sucks especially when there's no physical evidence provided. I don't even bother remembering what I ate yesterday, much less how/where I drove few weeks back.

 

Of course on Internet forum, everything is possible including avoiding a speeding bullet. But I can imagine countless scenarios where it'll be impossible for the TP to stop the offending car on the spot, e.g: TP was behind a red light and the offense happened at the next junction and was over before TP can give chase, etc. My humble opinion is the lack of video evidence shouldn't prevent police officers from exercising their powers. I don't think I want to live in a world where police will be powerless to act against offenders when they have no video evidence and everything is NVNT.

 

If I were TS, I would fight this all the way provided I can recall what I did exactly on the date/time of offense. If not I'll pay up rather than suffer the embarrassment and stress of being grilled in court by the prosecutor and judge. Even hiring a good lawyer will be useless if you can't recall the exact details to put up as defence.

  • Praise 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

TS Can you mention the location and time of offence ??  I kenna once also but I was stopped and got 12 points; Yes I was in dead hurry as I had a function to take care of and was overtaking from extreme left lane at ECP as right lane had hoggers driving at exactly 90 km/h ; They said they were not charging me for speeding as I was just like at 103 km/hr; They said I was doing like between 100-110km; Main bone of contention was that why I switched from Lane 1 to Lane 3 so fast so suddenly; Also it was an unmarked car  

 

Appealed with the Invitation Card as I had to pick someone up at the Airport for the function.... TP did not buy it and I had to pay up; At first they sent a letter saying its under investigation and I should not make the payment (so I thought got chance) for waiver and they said I was reckless in doing so and endagering other motorists.....etc (cant remember the exact words though)      

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what i mean. Look what you just typed out.

 

So many possibilities, matter of perception and judgment and also you “guess”. Which also means in the presence of a video, TS may not be guilty too depending on who is judging.

 

Worst thing, there is no evidence whatsoever. If it is me I will be utterly pissed.

 

i was saying for one case of TS experience, it can have hundreds of drivers abruptly switch lane that either posted online or the car behind just kept quiet since no accident or accident but no video captured (claim self insurance).

 

Whether TS is innocently not aware of his driving or the car behind over react for TP to take action, it is just one of the incident happen on the road, of course every driver would think they are good driver and not aware of what happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

TS should ask himself if he usually would have the signal lights blink at least 3 to 5 times BEFORE changing lanes, and filter into the next lane in 2 to 3 seconds.

 

Anything less I would consider abrupt.

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe TS can well afford the $150 fine and 6 points. What he buay song is he cannot be convinced if he really indeed commit the offence, and even if he did, the charges needs to be upfront right there and then.

 

TP should discharge his duty honorably by stopping his car and ascertain the driver's particulars. Then school him on his mistakes before issuing the summon. But instead, he got a anonymous letter informing of his offence (or furnish another person's particulars) he has no recollection of!! - this to me is a half-F job done dishonorably in a very poor "deep seated cultural issue" surfacing in the police force.

THIS!Thank you.

With due respect to the TP, I think they should improve on their system of issuing summons to be supported by evidence. Nowadays with technology, there are cameras everywhere, which can be tapped/improved upon to traffic offences.

Some posters asked and yes, it was stated in the notice the location and time: along a 3 lane road (not expressway), I was in the most right, changing lane to the next left lane. In the evening 6+pm.

I don't have hard evidence nor perfect memory of what happened, thus can't dispute confidently. Just like someone said you coughed last week at 630pm on Monday and your saliva landed on someone else's food causing her to kenna flu. Would you confidently say you didn't do it?

Right now to me, it's about an accusation without hard evidence which I felt wronged and yet have to suck it in. There was no accident, no harm done, no evidence that it did happen, just an accusation. Just because it was accused by a (ONE) TP, I have to suck it in.

 

Sorry I can't respond after this for the next 24 hours as I'm a newbie here. Got limits on how many I can post.

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have one incident like this, received a summon stated I drive recklessly only stated the place and date.

So I recalled and only remembered I saw a police van traveling alongside me there that time and I overtake them from the left as they were moving too slow. I thought it was Cisco or something, my guess is that the van was those tp van that ferry those cameraman around and drop them at specific location type.

Lesson learnt, so now see those van around also must treat them like tp.

I suspect ts also same case.

Just my guess.

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If time and location stated the TS has to ask himself

 

was he there at the time.

 

If he was on holiday and out of the country fight all the way.

 

If he was there then its probably correct.

 

Anyway people that change lanes abruptly always argue

 

they never do it.

 

Since TS never say its impossible for him to be there at the time 

 

and place. He should pay the fine.

 

Many bad drivers live in total denial.

 

And when people tell them they get very angry and lose it.

 

:D   

  • Praise 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

When there is no hard evidence (video or photo) to prove that you committed an offence, in my opinion there should be no grounds to issue you a summon. The TP should have stopped you there and then to summon you as the incident had just happened if he is right behind. You would have remembered what happened and you would have taken the ticket willingly if you are guilty.

 

To receive the ticket after the incident, you would have forgotten what happened plus any videos you may have already has been overwritten by new footage.

 

To sentence someone guilty just based on words of another person without hard evidence, even if the person is a public officer, seems wrong to me. Isnât the onus on the authority to provide sufficient evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty? Failing which the accused shall be deemed innocent.

 

I feel for you bro, this feeling sucks.

Yes. Finally someone likewise thinking. If I wrote early will get slap left/right again.

 

In the court it should not be one word against another word. There must be concrete evidence. Throw ciggies butt also must be issue with summon. Otherwise months later someone said you throw ciggies...my word against your word.

 

What I reckon TS might had caused an accident not to his knowledge. The rear vehicle/passerby reported it's vehicle nos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to go to court and argue against the TP officer who had booked you, who, in the eyes of the law is the material AND expert witness?

 

You can try lah!

Sure lose one!

Compounded fine will be increased further, should you lose!

 

 

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 2
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...