TexasCHLforum.com

So, my wife gets a ticket from Humble "Redlight Camera Enforcement Department" for $75. Obviously, she ran a redlight. Now, I have some basic problems with this. Number one, it's just creepy and flies in the face of all that is American; we are NOT supposed to be watched 24/7.

Secondly, it completely deprives the citizen of his constitutional right to confront his accuser.

Third, there is usually NO possible way to prove who was driving the vehicle on that particular day, at that particular time.

And fourth, the language is insane: If you do not pay them by the due day, they consider it an admission of guilt and acceptance of liability. If you pay the $75, the consider THAT an admission of guilt and acceptance of liability! HUH? Don't the rules that apply to other debt collection apply to cities? If Citibank arbitrarily sends me a bill and writes "failure to response constitutes acceptance of liability for the aforementioned debt," it holds no water! Courts have ruled on this dozens of times!

As I understand it, this is a civil debt, rather than an actual fine. What are the ramifications of refusing to pay it? How do we get out of it? The thought of playing the game and participating in a 'hearing' for something so absurd really gets under my skin, but I'm willing to do what it takes to keep from paying this stupid ticket.

Anyone have any REAL suggestions?

I have a friend who is a local LEO. He has told me that dozens of people have complained about their tickets. None of them have been able to get them dismissed. Good luck.

Got a lot of money and time on your hands?

Take it to court and keep appealing.

Someone years ago did this where I used to live, in Arizona. The courts basically found such tickets weren't wroth the paper they were printed on.

If you worry about being watched, your best bet is to probably to move to a smaller town. I live in a town that onld have one signal light and no red light cameras.

When I made a trip to Houston I got a Red Light ticket cause I didn't make a complete stop for a right on red. I took the easy road and just paid cause after seeing the video it was no way to say that I didn't stop. To me it is alot easier to pay $75 than it is to take off work and have to go to court. Pllus in the the long run it would cost me alot more.

i heard these were found to be unlawful
at least thats what KHOU said a few months ago

ProudNativeTexican wrote:If you worry about being watched, your best bet is to probably to move to a smaller town. I live in a town that onld have one signal light and no red light cameras.

When I made a trip to Houston I got a Red Light ticket cause I didn't make a complete stop for a right on red. I took the easy road and just paid cause after seeing the video it was no way to say that I didn't stop. To me it is alot easier to pay $75 than it is to take off work and have to go to court. Pllus in the the long run it would cost me alot more.

I'm not 'worried' about being watched, I just don't like it. And yes, I know fighting this will cost much more than the $75 ticket. This is by design.

First, I would like to state that I don't agree at all with the red light camera programs.

Second, let me provide a little "internal" insight to the program, at least in one specific Texas city.

The cameras are leased from an out of state company, who also handles basic processing of the violations. When your vehicle is captured by the camera, it goes into a processing queue at the company who actually ownes the cameras. They extract, either manually, or automatically, the license plate, and tie the plate registration information to the violation. Once this is complete, the violation goes to a queue for the city PD.

One, or multiple officers will review the violations in the queue, and either "accept" or "reject" the violation. At this stage, they have the ability to review the video and still photos of the incident. If they verify that the incident was a valid red light violation, AND the license plate in the photographs match the registration information tied to the violation, they accept the violation, and it continues to futher processing. If anything is incorrect, they reject the violation, and the process ends here.

Once an officer accepts the violation, it goes back to the original company for processing, where they print out the actual violation and mail it to you on behalf of the city.

You are right, it is a civil fine. You are also correct, the process is intentionally made to cost you extra money to "fight" the violation. Most people simply pay the $75 and are done with it. If you elect to dispute it, you will be scheduled to meet with a "prosecutor" of sorts, who will show you the video and still photos of the incident, and attempt in any way possible to get you to change your mind. Thus far, I haven't witnessed the process going any further than that.

I honestly don't know what the ramification would be to simply ignore the notice, but, consider this:

IANAL, but if you did not have to sign for the notice in the mail, they can't prove you ever received it in the first place. Now, I'm not suggesting that you lie and say you never received it, but, I am suggesting that they would have a very hard time pursuing anything legally if they could not prove that you received the violation in the first place. I have also heard that this actually applies to jury duty notices as well. (Although I am not going to be the one to test it)

It would seem that if you fail to respond, or fail to pay the civil fee, the absolute worst that could happen would be a civil suit or lein, plus legal fees.

Please let us know how things turn out with this.

kidder014 wrote:IANAL, but if you did not have to sign for the notice in the mail, they can't prove you ever received it in the first place. Now, I'm not suggesting that you lie and say you never received it, but, I am suggesting that they would have a very hard time pursuing anything legally if they could not prove that you received the violation in the first place. I have also heard that this actually applies to jury duty notices as well. (Although I am not going to be the one to test it)

You're kidding, right?

IANAL and I do not play one on TV.

The red light camera ticket is a civil offense. It does not go against your driving record.

If you choose to fight it you will lose. They tickets are reviewed by LEO before they are sent out. They discard the iffy ones, at least I was told the City of Houston does.

Pay the fine and let it go. Don't run any more red lights. Stop quickly and let the tailgater behind you hit you, sue them and get rich. Hire the Texas Hammer as your attorney.

I managed to run a redlight in Houston last year and received one of their tickets.

Anygunanywhere

I know how this will probably end. I'll whine and moan, but eventually roll over like an impotent toad and pay the $75. However, I have to question the logic behind all this (yes, what does logic have to do with government?). They have to PROVE I was driving, right? I'm not compelled to admit or not that I was driving. Doing so violates my 5th amendment rights, does it not? It seems so simple, yet they have made it so complex to ensure they get our money.

Actually, no they dont.

A law was passed that states the registered owner is responsible for red light violations regardless of the driver of the vehicle at the time.

kidder014 wrote:Actually, no they dont.

A law was passed that states the registered owner is responsible for red light violations regardless of the driver of the vehicle at the time.

Gotta love those legislators. I wonder how much money from the redlight cameras goes toward building their summer homes?

Texas Transportation Code Chapter 707 applies to this.

Here is the section regarding failure to pay:

707.019. FAILURE TO PAY CIVIL PENALTY. (a) If the
owner of the motor vehicle fails to timely pay the amount of the
civil penalty imposed against the owner:
(1) an arrest warrant may not be issued for the owner;
and
(2) the imposition of the civil penalty may not be
recorded on the owner's driving record.
(b) Notice of Subsection (a) must be included in the notice
of violation required by Section 707.011(c).

DoubleActionCHL wrote:I wonder how much money from the redlight cameras goes toward building their summer homes?

It looks like after they send 50% to the state, they can use the rest for..... get this....... putting up more cameras!!! or for "traffic safety" programs of course...

Since they can't confirm who was driving, it doesn't go against your driving record. If they catch you in person, it does.

You're not going to beat it, just pay it and stop next time.

SCone wrote:You're not going to beat it, just pay it and stop next time.

Probably true, but the fact that it is true still chaps me. You can't realistically challenge laws like this unless you are independently wealthy - and that has given us some really bad laws.