Traffic violation procedures

So far, I’ve got four $167 parking tickets sitting there unpaid. They actually called me into court to ask if I wanted to settle up or opt for community service instead. I told them I’d rather do the work... It’s been nearly a year and a half since then, and honestly? Crickets. Not a word from anyone.

I suspect the way they define community service varies depending on which state you're in—specifically when it comes to what kind of tasks are actually on the approved list.

Usually, it’s stuff like working in hospitals, helping out in a lab, handling intake at a facility, assisting in nursing homes, or doing landscaping...

Luckily, my county hasn't officially finalized their list yet. At this rate, I’m betting the whole thing just expires or gets tossed out due to the statute of limitations. Actually, I think it might have already happened...

Actually, I haven't heard any reports that anyone has actually completed those community service hours yet either. 🤷

Look, I’ve heard the rumors and seen the proof with my own eyes...

But honestly, it doesn't even matter, because there’s already a massive thread covering all of this!! ☕

Honestly, you might as well just pay the fine right there on the spot—and double it while you're at it... Of course, everyone tries to wiggle out of it, but I’ve personally seen more than my fair share of cops driving around with their phones tucked into their ears, totally hands-free, acting like they're above the rules while they're busy writing me a ticket.😲

fadedrider02 said:Hey everyone, I could use some advice here:
Does anyone know how the statute of limitations actually works for traffic violations (specifically speeding)? The citation happened back in April 2006, and I filed an appeal in August 2006. Since then, absolutely nothing happened. Then, out of nowhere two months ago, the police show up at my house to serve a decision. They couldn't catch me because I was away on a business trip. Now, they’re showing up again these past few days trying to "escort" me to municipal court... Can they even do that if they haven't officially served me the decision yet? Or at least attempted to? What's the deal with the statute of limitations in these cases? And what should my next move be...

From what I gathered, since you already filed an appeal, you've already been through the court system.
Under the old laws that applied to you, the statute of limitations was two years from the date of the offense, which means it expired in April 2008.

Jacob Miller2 said:Come on, kid, read a little more. ☕

What do you mean "repeatedly ignoring the law"? Who said I support speeding or anything like that? As for what you wrote... wake up, man, and stop repeating the same thing over and over. We all know this stuff. Blah, blah, speeding... blah, blah, appeals... It gets a bit tedious when someone keeps showing up acting like a hero, preaching the same sermon. Do something instead of giving me these pointless replies that have nothing to do with my actual point.

As for the court thing, I'm not surprised at all that they went after me. I actually laughed at the summons, and obviously, I didn't show up. There's also the option of a written defense, since they can't drag you to court for that. I'm talking about my specific case: speeding, but I had no prior violations. That's already been settled via the statute of limitations anyway.
And yeah, there's a difference between driving 60 in a 40 zone on a highway versus doing 60 through a residential neighborhood. But I guess that nuance doesn't fit into your rehearsed logic.☕
You're getting things mixed up and just talking nonsense. I don't go racing through town at night; I don't need high speeds for a thrill. And of course, it bothers me when kids tear through the streets just because they have no other way to show off in their dad's car.

The best part of all this is your comment about "wondering why they won't accept my appeals." 🤣 If you haven't realized—and I suspect you're the only one who hasn't—that was a joke. They can't accept my appeal because there's undeniable evidence 🙂 that I did it, right? Is that why I was bothering with an appeal in the first place? 😉

Later.

To me, seeing five smiley faces made it feel more like mockery than actual humor, just saying...
Well, fine, if that's how you want to take it... but honestly, those constant appeals of yours feel like you're just making a mockery of the entire legal system.

And look, if it’s boring to see "some hero" constantly jumping into the replies of posts like this, then it’s also pretty tedious to watch someone constantly brag about playing fast and loose with the law (and I don't mean just you; my entire post wasn't even directed solely at you).

driftingridge18 said:To me, seeing five smiley faces made it feel more like mockery than actual humor, just saying...
Well, fine, if that's how you want to take it... but honestly, those constant appeals of yours feel like you're just making a mockery of the entire legal system.

And look, if it’s boring to see "some hero" constantly jumping into the replies of posts like this, then it’s also pretty tedious to watch someone constantly brag about playing fast and loose with the law (and I don't mean just you; my entire post wasn't even directed solely at you).

The legal system is what it is. Right now, it's flawed. Of course, I'm not going to pay a fine if I don't have to; I'm not breaking any rules there.

No, it's just tiresome having "some street hero" pop up in every single reply... As far as I recall, the topic was about how to handle a statute of limitations on a traffic ticket (basically, how to make that happen). What I wrote wasn't boasting; it was just describing how I managed to trigger the statute of limitations. But then the thread gets flooded with pointless posts from people who aren't actually trying to answer the question, but instead just comment on how it isn't moral. Whatever.

...So, I was wondering if it’s actually possible to rig those police speed cameras. Like, could they be set to capture your speed while you're still cruising at a higher limit, and then just snap the photo once you get closer to them?

Here’s my situation—there’s a camera positioned about 300 yards from where the residential zone starts. Even without a specific sign, the speed limit drops to 35 mph because it's a neighborhood, right? It's just flat, open road out there. I was coming from a rural stretch where the limit is 55. I was actually driving slightly under 55, but I slowed down as I entered the town to make sure I wouldn't get caught doing over 45 when I got near the officer. I know for a fact I wasn't going that fast. So, is it possible the device clocked my speed back when I was outside the residential area, held onto that data, and then triggered the photo as I pulled up?

By the way, how long does the statute of limitations last for these tickets?

So, I was involved in a car accident yesterday. I failed to yield the right of way to another vehicle, which brings me to my question: is there any chance the liability could be shifted onto him if he was traveling at roughly 50 miles mph through a residential area? It happened at this small, poorly lit intersection tucked between some buildings. To clarify the sequence of events, I had already merged back into my lane when the collision occurred because his car swerved while he was braking. The police measured the skid marks on the pavement; they noted that the impact hit the side of my car, but they also confirmed that I was the one who failed to yield. Naturally, his speed was significantly higher than the limit. The officers told me I’ll have to wait for the accident reconstruction expert's report to come back. I’m trying to wrap my head around what the fallout might look like so I can prepare myself, especially since the damage to my car is massive. Is it even possible for his insurance to cover my damages due to his excessive speed, or is the fact that I failed to yield the deciding factor that leaves my insurance solely responsible for his repairs? Thanks.

A neighbor of mine dealt with an identical collision. Unfortunately, she was held liable and had to cover his damages. He was also speeding like crazy, but the police didn't cite him for causing the accident—they just slapped her with a ticket for speeding. That said, if you were already firmly established in your lane... anything can happen. I hope someone with more expertise weighs in; I’m just sharing an anecdote, and honestly, I can't even remember if she had fully merged into her lane or not at that moment. 🤷

Honestly, you both have a piece of this on your hands.

And as far as those legal violations go, there's already a massive thread covering all that... ☕

driftingfox13 said:So, I was involved in a car accident yesterday. I failed to yield the right of way to another vehicle, which brings me to my question: is there any chance the liability could be shifted onto him if he was traveling at roughly 50 miles mph through a residential area? It happened at this small, poorly lit intersection tucked between some buildings. To clarify the sequence of events, I had already merged back into my lane when the collision occurred because his car swerved while he was braking. The police measured the skid marks on the pavement; they noted that the impact hit the side of my car, but they also confirmed that I was the one who failed to yield. Naturally, his speed was significantly higher than the limit. The officers told me I’ll have to wait for the accident reconstruction expert's report to come back. I’m trying to wrap my head around what the fallout might look like so I can prepare myself, especially since the damage to my car is massive. Is it even possible for his insurance to cover my damages due to his excessive speed, or is the fact that I failed to yield the deciding factor that leaves my insurance solely responsible for his repairs? Thanks.

I dealt with something pretty similar once; I pulled out right in front of a guy who was driving the wrong way down a one-way street meant only for taxis and buses. I need to dig through my files to see exactly what kind of ticket they slapped me with—I remember paying something in the ballpark of a few hundred bucks—but I think he got fined too. I honestly don't know if he managed to get anything from his insurance since he was also in the wrong, though maybe he walked away with 50% coverage? As for the damage to my own car after he slammed into me, I ended up paying for those repairs entirely out of pocket. Honestly, failing to yield is usually considered a much heavier offense than going the wrong way on a one-way, but given that your guy was only doing 50 miles mph, that might work in your favor. I actually forgot how fast he was going when I saw the police measuring the speed of the guy who hit me 🙄

driftingfox13 said:So, I was involved in a car accident yesterday. I failed to yield the right of way to another vehicle, which brings me to my question: is there any chance the liability could be shifted onto him if he was traveling at roughly 50 miles mph through a residential area? It happened at this small, poorly lit intersection tucked between some buildings. To clarify the sequence of events, I had already merged back into my lane when the collision occurred because his car swerved while he was braking. The police measured the skid marks on the pavement; they noted that the impact hit the side of my car, but they also confirmed that I was the one who failed to yield. Naturally, his speed was significantly higher than the limit. The officers told me I’ll have to wait for the accident reconstruction expert's report to come back. I’m trying to wrap my head around what the fallout might look like so I can prepare myself, especially since the damage to my car is massive. Is it even possible for his insurance to cover my damages due to his excessive speed, or is the fact that I failed to yield the deciding factor that leaves my insurance solely responsible for his repairs? Thanks.

Your insurance will likely cover his damages, along with any medical claims he decides to file, though his final payout might be reduced by maybe 20-30% due to his own negligence.

driftingfox13 said:So, I was involved in a car accident yesterday. I failed to yield the right of way to another vehicle, which brings me to my question: is there any chance the liability could be shifted onto him if he was traveling at roughly 50 miles mph through a residential area? It happened at this small, poorly lit intersection tucked between some buildings. To clarify the sequence of events, I had already merged back into my lane when the collision occurred because his car swerved while he was braking. The police measured the skid marks on the pavement; they noted that the impact hit the side of my car, but they also confirmed that I was the one who failed to yield. Naturally, his speed was significantly higher than the limit. The officers told me I’ll have to wait for the accident reconstruction expert's report to come back. I’m trying to wrap my head around what the fallout might look like so I can prepare myself, especially since the damage to my car is massive. Is it even possible for his insurance to cover my damages due to his excessive speed, or is the fact that I failed to yield the deciding factor that leaves my insurance solely responsible for his repairs? Thanks.

What was the posted speed limit for the direction he was traveling?
Look, the way speed limits near intersections are calculated is actually pretty interesting—they basically measure how much time an average driver needs to safely merge into traffic. That timeframe is compared against the line of sight to determine a safe speed for the main road, ensuring a driver can avoid someone who just pulled out by simply easing off the gas.
To put it more simply: if he wasn't even within your field of vision at the exact moment you started merging into traffic, then his excessive speed becomes the primary cause of the accident.
Just hang in there for the expert's report; those specialists are great at "rewinding the tape" to pinpoint exactly where he was positioned when you began your maneuver. If it turns out he truly was outside your line of sight, you could potentially walk away with full coverage for your damages.

brightcrane56 said:What was the posted speed limit for the direction he was traveling?
Look, the way speed limits near intersections are calculated is actually pretty interesting—they basically measure how much time an average driver needs to safely merge into traffic. That timeframe is compared against the line of sight to determine a safe speed for the main road, ensuring a driver can avoid someone who just pulled out by simply easing off the gas.
To put it more simply: if he wasn't even within your field of vision at the exact moment you started merging into traffic, then his excessive speed becomes the primary cause of the accident.
Just hang in there for the expert's report; those specialists are great at "rewinding the tape" to pinpoint exactly where he was positioned when you began your maneuver. If it turns out he truly was outside your line of sight, you could potentially walk away with full coverage for your damages.

limit 25 miles/mph... the thing is, there’s zero visibility at that intersection. I had to pull out about three or four feet past the stop sign before he even entered my field of vision. Between the poor visibility of the intersection itself and the fact that a large SUV was parked right there blocking the view, it was tough.
When I finally saw him coming at a high rate of speed, I stepped on it to get into my lane, and while I managed to make it, he skidded and—bam—hit my side. He actually told the Police Department he was going 44 miles/mph (which means he was likely going even faster, since people rarely admit to speeding themselves). Now I'm just stuck... thanks.

Based on what you’ve described, the stopping distance was only about thirty feet, which means his speed played a massive role in the accident. 25 milesHowever, I have to be honest—the part where you mentioned having to pull out a good few feet past the stop sign just to get a clear line of sight isn't going to help your case. Between the poor visibility at the intersection and those three cars parked right there blocking everything, it still wasn't legal to enter the intersection. You really should have had someone step out to check if the coast was clear before pulling out.
I’d suggest taking a hard look at whether it’s actually worth the headache of hiring experts or fighting this in court. From the way you've laid it out, it sounds like the Police Department is going to find both of you at fault, leaving you to split the damages 50-50.

brightcrane56 said:Based on what you’ve described, the stopping distance was only about thirty feet, which means his speed played a massive role in the accident. 25 milesHowever, I have to be honest—the part where you mentioned having to pull out a good few feet past the stop sign just to get a clear line of sight isn't going to help your case. Between the poor visibility at the intersection and those three cars parked right there blocking everything, it still wasn't legal to enter the intersection. You really should have had someone step out to check if the coast was clear before pulling out.
I’d suggest taking a hard look at whether it’s actually worth the headache of hiring experts or fighting this in court. From the way you've laid it out, it sounds like the Police Department is going to find both of you at fault, leaving you to split the damages 50-50.

It's a shame I lost some $20000 so even if it ends up 50-50, it still hits me where it hurts... thanks a lot.

Ashley Barnes26 said:From what I gathered, since you already filed an appeal, you've already been through the court system.
Under the old laws that applied to you, the statute of limitations was two years from the date of the offense, which means it expired in April 2008.

So, how long was that "old" law actually in effect? Like, when did the new one officially kick in?

Well, if you’re looking at damages totaling $20000, I’m guessing we’re talking about a relatively recent—and let’s face it, pricey—ride... so, why on earth don't you have full coverage?

Kimberly Sanders4 and krulesays👎
Imagine two self-righteous types arguing over laws they think are totally broken. It makes me wonder—would you actually shell out a hundred bucks for a speeding ticket? Say, going fifteen over the limit. You pay the government, because clearly the state needs its cut—it doesn't really matter if the rest of us are barely scraping by.😠

Keep it civil—no swearing or insults, please.