Good day and thank you for an informative website.
I would like to know, since when is the AARTO system effective, and is the older sec 341 notices still valid? My father received a sec 341 notice for speeding (taking by means of a camera) on 13 August 2010. Should this fine be paid or is it worth the effort to contest it in court?

 Is the procedures for getting the fine reduced (as he is a pensioner) for this sec 341 notice still the same (approach the senior prosecutor and lay your case in front of him for a decision etc) or does he need to do it according to the new AARTO procedures? seeing that this is not an AARTO fine with no demerit points or discount applicable etc.

Is the AARTO system in effect nationally and applicable to all municipalities or could smaller municipalities still use the sec 341 notices?

Awaiting your response and thank you for your time. 
Sidney

Vish,

Sorry boet but my thumbs got crossed. It is in fact Act 93 of 1996. The old Ordinance was 21 of 1966. Apologies for supplying wrong info.

Carmen,

Welcome to greedfines. If pigs could fly, your local Police station would be an airport. Seriously though; there is nothing wrong, legally , with what they are doing. In Plettenberg Bay, they trap uvzqfq at less than 2km apart. The same applies in Richmond/Hanover. Nowhere in the Act does it stipulate how far apart greed traps may be placed. Sorry, you speed, you pay.

Steve,

You are innocent till proven guilty! No one can force you to disclose who the given driver was on any day/night! The fuzz will have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you, photographed from behind were the driver. Please bear in mind that a summons is issued against a PERSON, a live human being,  not a Company or CC.

Vish,

It's not a Regulation; it's simply Section 58 of the Road Traffic Act 93 of 1966. That is very general and deals with disobeying (naughty boy) a road traffic sign. QED. Do not get a funny idea in your head that as this Act came into being in 1966 that it is outdated. Speeding is fine, provided that you are on a race track.

can i be trapped in a 70km, 90 km speed zones and where is the regulations that support this.

A mate has just told me that any speed fine photo taken from behind is not legal. Is he correct? I am sceptical and would like to know what the law is regarding speeding fines from the rear.

Good Day

I would like to know if traffic cops have the right to place speed cameras +- 2 km apart from each other. I received 2 separate traffic fines on the same day within 3 minutes apart from each other, the first on the M2 West near Cleveland & Chilvers road at 07: 55 and the second at the M2 West near Heidelberg road & Selby at 07:58 and although I do not deny that I was exceeding the speed limit I would like to know whether this is legit.

As I hire out my 10 and 14 seater vehicles and have different drivers all the time, I realise that there will be fines and am willing to pay such and recuperate same from the drivers, but - to charge companies and small businesses 3 times the actual amount is just making me rebel against the whole new system.  Now I do not even feel like going the extra mile because I feel exploited.

Good day, I would like to know if it is valid for the JMPD to want to prosecute me for 2 fines made out 3 years back, however I only received a notification this month of the 2 fines outstanding.
My point is, the fines are 3 years old and they only notify me now. Is it legal?

Hi there

I have read through your comments and I see just about every issue has been spoken about.

The one thing that concerns me is the way the Traffic officials themselves drive. Are they not meant to set an example or our roads as to how to drives responsibly and safely? But instead you see them driving like they own the road and as if the law doesn’t apply to them. On numerous occasions I have seen them speeding and driving recklessly on our roads and this with no siren or lights on. As you said what’s good for the goose... we should begin trapping and fining them...

Our Comments:

Absolutely Ernie.

That is what our wall of shame is for. It would be nice if we could get them to pay fines too but in the absence of that possibility, report them all to the RTMC on 0861 400 800 so they can get sent a letter in the post.

Hello Greedfines,

I love your site - well done.

Re: AARTO.  If a letter for a traffic violation is sent, as is currently the case, is this letter (under aarto) now equal to a summons?  With our useless postal service, the letter may never arrive.  What happens then?  Surely the fact that (they say) a letter was sent is not acceptable?  Or will they use the registered letter service?

Even then, a registered letter is not a summons.  In terms of the law, a summons must be delivered in person.  Are we to be deemed guilty and have our civil liberties trodden on because the ?police? are too pathetic to do their job properly.

We will have points deducted (added?) without our knowledge and eventually be driving (unknowingly) with a suspended license.

Any comments?

(When does the demerit system come into force?)

And please add me to your mailing list.

All the very best for a safe and prosperous 2010!

JPSA Comments:

Let's tackle one point at a time.

1. All details on how infringement notices and other AARTO documentation gets delivered appears on our AARTO page.
2. Registered post is the legislated means of delivery, however secure post - which is not the same as registered post has been used for this purpose.
3. Most AARTO documents are not equivallent to a summons and can therefore be delivered by this means.
4. Section 341 notices (old style fines) were not even required to be sent by registered post.
5. Summonses issued in respect to section 341 notices had to be delivered in person because they were issued under the Criminal Procedure Act.
6. AARTO de-criminalises the process unless the offence is of such a serious nature that it is handed over to the criminal courts.
7. Whilst this may seem to be good news, remember that the requirement for serving civil summons in South Africa is an absolute joke. Civil summonses are considered to be served even if they are simply thrown over the fence of your premises or indeed shoved in your postbox or gate - not handed to a person! Civil summonses may be served on your previous address without you even knowing as much. This stinks to high heaven!
8. The first you know of it, could be when the Sherrif pitches up at your doorstep to grab your TV to settle your outstanding fines. They will bother to track you down to execute a warrant of execution, but have no interest in doing so prior to that stage.
9. The only way that you could have points added to your license without knowing as much is if you have failed to update your details (and check that it has indeed been done) on eNatIS. It is therefore vitally important that you make certain that your details are correct on eNatIS and collect your mail.
10. The points-demerit system comes into effect (as does AARTO) in the entire country on 1 April 2010.

God help us all if this is not done correctly.

Best Regards,

Howard Dembovsky
National Chairman - Justice Project South Africa

While I can see your point of view and agree that the police do not do enough for road safety, you come off just as biased and short sighted as the people you complain about, severely compromising what you claim you're trying to do.

Finding examples is not hard, here's one near the top of your main page...
"To quote Director Gerneke of the JMPD, "if we don't hide, we won't get cases. Then we would have wasted our day". Indeed sir, you would have generated no revenue (or very little) but you may just have saved a life. What a waste of a day indeed!"

Your sniping aside. Have you even considered the possibility that if they were all visible they would not only catch less speeders but also have other ramifications. Such as speeders suddenly slowing down to avoid a fine which clearly has the potential to cause accidents, or how if they were always visible people would simply speed once past them and even be more inclined to speed since they could just keep an eye open for them or otherwise know where they are. All that versus people not knowing when or where they might be caught possibly leading to a "rather safe than sorry" attitude. It's not hard to see which encourages more safety as only one leaves a lingering thought that if they speed they might get caught, anytime, anywhere. Also this is not even getting into the need the police have for funding.

What your thinking would have is far less safe while hampering their budget, which will of course have a knockon effect on other budgets within the police, making you a far greater threat than what you complain about. However continue your biased, narrow minded, sarcastic and rude ramblings as anyone of even bellow average intelligence willing to spend a moment to think about it will easily come to realise this and see your almost fanatical misguided anger.

Infact I can only hope that the true purpose of your site is an attempt to get advertising revenue (hello Page Sponsorship?), as that makes far more sense than the mumbojumbo spewed across it's pages masquerading as content.

Sincerely
Just an average road used.

Our Comments:

1. You are entitled to your opinion - misguided as it may be. Incidentally, the police do not enforce traffic law in this country - sorry to burst your bubble so quickly.
2. We most certainly have considered the possibility of them catching less people and causing motorists to slow down. The harm in that in your opinion is what exactly?
3. If taking money from motorists made them sorry, or adopt the "better safe than sorry" ethos, then the fines system would be catching way less motorists than 290,000 in December 2009 alone don't you think? BTW, less than 5% were stopped and fined.
4. It may come as a surprise to you since you clearly have no idea of where this money goes, but the Police do not receive a single cent from this practice. How pray tell would their budget be affected?
5. Thanks for granting us your permission to continue in our efforts. We will, with or without your permission - big shot!
6. Before you see fit to accuse us or being narrow-minded, below average intelligence, etc, perhaps you should either learn to spell or pretend that you can by using the fantastic spell check feature in your email editor. People in glass houses...
7. Just so everyone knows, our monthly advertising revenue is R0.00 since no-one has sponsored a single page - ever.
8. Setting up your web based email as no@reply.com shows just how immature you are and establishes that you are indeed a coward of significant proportion.
9. There are a few things I can think of that you can eat, starting with your words and yes, what you were thinking I was going to say too.
10. Now lick it, put a stamp on it and mail it to someone who gives a damn. Perhaps bite@me.com!

The email was received from:

out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25] from machine name compute1.internal

Hi Greedfines

I took a look at your website.  I have had from day one of the National speed limits, a great deal of suspicion of the purpose and manner of the campaign that continues to this day.  I am always deeply suspicious of anything that needs a lie, subterfuge, collusion, deceit or secrecy to promote it.

While I have no love of speed cops I also understand that this problem is not entirely of their making.  It is the result of the quick fix solution politicians so willingly apply rather than the expensive, difficult real solution.  Instead of telling the cops to buzz off when this idea was promoted and the research showed a waste of time, the NP was sold the idea by ensuring that the funds generated would go to national coffers, playing on the greed of politicians and their unwillingness to spend on public services.  That while the public was outraged at the then lower road death rate.

"Speed kills" is patently a fear campaign based on false information that should tell you something, yet you support it and even demand it.  Look it up - propaganda.

The speed cops will provide in any way they can and since it will always be an easy cash generator no matter how one tries to make it open and visible, cops will find easy ways of making themsleves look good and the bosses happy.  Besides, they do not want to work harder than necessary to do their work anyway, do you?

That said, where is the research that shows controlling speed to some defined limit will save lives?  What is this magic limit?  How is it defined and applied?  Speed influences the severity of an accident it does not prevent them.  Nor can it be assumed a life will be saved or could have been saved.

The problem with SA drivers is well known.  They have a total disregard for the rules of the road and the law.  Alcohol plays the biggest part because drivers feel confident that they can drive drunk and not get caught.  Drivers drive like idiots because they can.  Moving violations are far too hard to catch and prosecute. 

What a wonderful idea speed trapping was.  So easy and we can claim lives saved for doing nothing to reduce driver arrogance and disregard for the law.  No need for hard working competent traffic cops, expensive visible patrols and the difficult prosecution of moving violations. 

Heck why bother with any traffic violations.  The cops can now justified by the lie claim they are doing a wonderful job speed trapping and saving lives making the bosses very happy by bringing loads of money. 

No politician is going to risk public anger and scorn by claiming "speed kills" is a lie or invest many billions in providing a service nobody demands.

Our Comments:

Not quite nobody Peter. The likes of TMT, Syntell, MVS Phumelelo, TCS etc. demand this service because it makes them very rich indeed. That speed (or more accurately the sudden stop) kills is not the issue. Money certainly is.

The Directorate of Public Prosecutions is responsible for the required permits needed for the traffic authorities to set up the speed traps using SME equipment.

I can't find any South African website containing all the authorised speed trap locations. Because this information is almost impossible to find for most drivers, this public information is probably kept secret intentionally which is an offence in itself.  
Why is it not generally available and easy accessible to the motorists?.

Could you perhaps publish the DPP approved speed trap locations it on your website?

Kind regards
Paul 

JPSA Comments:

The issue surrounding DPP approvals is an emotive and hotly debated one. We would love to publish what we have on the internet but that would get their backs right up because in their view this is not public information.

So much so that we only became party to the list of authorisations because of the arrogance and “up yours” attitude of John van der Westhuizen at the JMPD in May 2009 when he tried to display how the JMPD was in fact operating within the stipulated approvals. Since then a number of changes have taken place and we do not have that information at hand.

The root of the matter, from our perspective, is as follows:

• Camera trapping is by far the biggest revenue earner for local authorities.
• This phenomenon is not limited to South Africa but is in fact a worldwide phenomenon.
• South Africa has just fine tuned it to a fine art form, all but abandoning any other form of traffic enforcement.
• It is estimated that the income from this activity may even exceed income from rates and taxes and is not limited to persons that own property in the particular municipal area.
• The DPP seems to feel that it is contributing to a safer South Africa by allowing, and in fact encouraging this practice.
• There was an effort at a stage to declare the Garmin and other navigational equipment “Custom POI’s” illegal.
• There are sites that list where speed traps are located (www.speedtraps.co.za, etc.) – these too were to be included in the declaration of illegality.
• Complaints where camera speed traps are set up in unauthorised sites have met with an aggressive, dismissive attitude from the DPP – only to have them withdraw authorisation quietly in the background.
• The DPP and AARTO claims that authorisation for trapping is no longer required in Johannesburg and Tshwane as the AARTO Act does not mention the TCSP guidelines.
• Interestingly, the TCSP guidelines are not mentioned in the National Road Traffic Act or the Criminal Procedure Act either so it can be argued that this standpoint is invalid.
• The Department of Transport (DoT) and the Road Traffic Management Corporation (RTMC) actively encourage the use of speed cameras.
• It is claimed that these are set up in “dangerous places”, however they fail to tell the public where dangerous places are.
• Surely if these areas are indeed dangerous, it would be in the public interest to be informed of the danger presented to them?
• So you can die or get a fine but not be told that the area is dangerous. Bizarre!
• Instead, speed cameras are set up in exceedingly more covert manners, with camouflage even being employed to hide the cameras and the officers operating them.
• At the risk of losing focus on the topic at hand, I need to comment that a massive thing is made of how many people die on South African roads (as it should be) but by balance, little is said about how many people are raped and murdered in this country each year. According to statistics:
• A woman has little chance of being involved in a fatal collision in this country but stands a 1 in 3 chance of being raped.
• It is estimated that a woman born in South Africa has a greater chance of being raped than learning how to read.
• The Guinness Book of Records and Interpol both say that South Africa holds the record for the highest rape rate in the world.
• There are about 50,000 reported cases every year in South Africa, 50% of which are against children and babies.
• The police's child protection unit estimates that only one in 15 child rapes are reported.
• It is estimated that 500,000 rapes take place in South Africa every year, although this figure is said to be a minimum, with too many cases going unreported.
• While police crime statistics show that there were 21 683 murders in the year 2000, the Medical Research Council puts the figure at 32 482.  Interpol claims even higher numbers of murders in South Africa - up to 54 298 in one year. Interpol's figures are approximately double the numbers of "murders known to the police" in South Africa.
• According to Interpol, South Africa has the highest recorded per capita murder rate, second only to Colombia.
• By comparison, an average of 14 978 people have died on South African Roads per annum over the past 8 years.
• There are a reported 148 068 police officers in the SAPS as of November 2009 to police an estimated 41 million people.
• There are easily that many (if not more) traffic officers (including the so-called Metro Police) who do little nothing to combat or even investigate crime.
• The combined reported rape rate and Interpol murder rate is nearly 7 times the amount of road fatalities, yet focus is taken off this fact by greedy and non-caring officials by carrying on about road fatalities. Go figure!

Authorisation for camera trapping used to have a specific purpose to it in that the municipalities had to justify just how dangerous those specific sites where and why they could not stop alleged infringers. This has been bastardised and has evolved into determining where the most revenue can be generated, forsaking all other forms of law enforcement in order to drive a very profitable industry – regardless of how many people die on our roads.

Our standpoint on road traffic is simple. South African motorists must regard each and every square kilometre in this country as an “authorised site” and act accordingly. There is no justification for reckless speeding – ever – and profiteering from this practice is despicable and indeed a dereliction of duty on the part of the authorities.

There is a tremendous need for a culture of compliance with the rules of the road and courtesy and consideration towards other motorists to be imbibed in every motorist. This South African culture of “I will do what I like to whom I like,  when I like” has got to stop. Hiding in vegetation, dustbins, behind barriers etc. photographing “infringers” is not achieving this task and is in fact encouraging this behaviour – especially where those committing the offences have the money to do so. The points demerit system will not alter this – it will merely fuel a new crime industry of points sale by syndicates.

Have a look at our “Eyewitness Programme” (www.jp-sa.org/eyewitness.htm) to see how we think traffic matters could be tackled differently.

Best Regards,

Howard Dembovsky
National Chairman - Justice Project South Africa

Formal Written Authorisation for a site for a speed measurement exercise?

On recent TV programs (i.e. Special assignment, etc),  it was shown that written authorisations must be optained for the exact site, location, direction, speed, etc before a fixed or mobile camera may be operated.
I can't find any specific reference to this requirement on your website nor can I find a website containing all the authorised speed trap locations.

GPS devices (Garmin, Tom-Tom, Road Angel, etc) warn drivers of fixed and mobile safety cameras on the road. Where do they get this information?

Kind regards
Paul

I would like to put my comment for viewers…

Personally , I think that all speed cameras’ as well as the officers’ manning them should be in plain sight for all motorists to see (should be made law).
In my view , that is the best way to reduce speeding. What is the effectiveness of an on-duty officer who cant be seen ??? (out of sight, out of mind)

After all , the whole point of fining motorists , is to teach them that speeding is dangerous and endangers innocent lives.

If no officer is in sight (hidden in the bushes), the motorists will continue to speed and drive wrecklessly and even try to brake hard at the very last moment to try and avoid the “flash” .  that to me, can be even more dangerous….

This is just my view.

Good work you should be commended on the work you are doing to stamp out authorities stampeding over the public.

I am in the process of trying to negotiate a fine same place where 2 months ago the fine was discarded because of the fact there was no authorization to trap on that road during construction (N1 North at/ near Dieplkloof Interchange (N12) Construction Zone) on a Sunday morning. I have again asked if they now have authorization and will await an answer.

Keep up the battle.

I am referring to yesterdays Star,’Bid to stop mobile cameras’. In this article it is mentioned about the scrapping of fines last year. I am one of the fools who paid a R300 fine because I did not want to experience problems over the festive season in a road block.

However I have duly lodged in writing a request after obtaining the correct procedure of pay-back of the unlawful fine.

Above request was made on 19 January 2009 and after numerous calls the only answer is that there is a ‘backlog’ of refunds.

This backlog is now going for 5 months.

Are there any other road users facing the same problem.

Sirs,

Just read your website. Thank you. Excellent information and special thanks to those who did all the homework to gather these facts.

I have a couple of questions that might interest you.

You, or I, are not permitted to erect a speed limit sign on a public road. This role surely has to be legislated. If you or I cannot do so then I would submit that the construction worker/foreman/manager is not legally entitled to do so, either.

At a guess I’d say that only the municipal engineer of the municipality concerned, or the regional/national engineer for provincial/national roads, would be lawfully entitled to determine the positioning of speed restriction signs.

Speed restriction zones in road-construction areas are constantly changing. Does such engineer “authorize” each and every speed reduction zone?

Somehow I don’t thinks so – how about you?

So, who places these temporary speed restriction signs?

Perhaps your experts could research this situation and add your findings to this already most informative website.

Secondly:

Stop signs – another quick-buck revenue earner, especially when you can see approaching/cross traffic for kilometers in all directions. You know the ones – where a yield sign would more than be sufficient.

It occurs to me that stops signs will be regulated. I’m sure that specifications will exist that says the stop-sign pole has to be x distance from the stop-line/intersecting road and y distance from the kerb line on the road on which you are traveling. I’m also sure that the actual stop-line must be a certain width, must be readily visible and MUST be present.

Now, how many intersections carry faded, tarred-over, almost invisible stop lines? How many stop sign poles comply with the stated distance measurements?

Could it not be argued that such stop-signs are “improperly constituted” and therefore illegal and unlawful?

I’d like to see your comment added to your web site on this issue, too.

The South African motorist owes a debt of gratitude for the information you are supplying. Once again, thank you.

Hi,

I have just learnt about this site today. I have read some of the comments and I share the same sentiments. Nobody condones speed but I have found this days, the only way to feed the municipalities is through speed fines.

The concept of Traffic officers hiding their vehicle just to catch you is beyond my comprehension. People need to be educated and traffic officers they should do that. Few policing you see around, there are hardcore criminals now but there is little that is done.

Clear signs where cameras are must be set and be visible.

What on earth happened to the first rule of the road - Keep left & pass Right????

Obviously the only serious offense is speed - contributory factors like white lines, doing 30 km per hour in the right lane because I will be turning right within 5 km and other such trivialities do not contribute toward road traffic accidents?

If the traffic departments' record of traceable efforts was denuded of speeding offences, they would probably only work 2 hours a day (or less)

Dear Sir,

I have also received speed fines that looks exactly the same as the one on your fraud fines. Also Potchefstroom with exactly everything the same, difference in numbers, not bank details. Do I have to pay the fines? It adds up to R1000-00 of fines on three different occasions. How do I know it is actually the real fine?

The traffic officer is sitting on a big stone, he is stabilized but the camera is swinging from left to right. There are even other vehicles in the photo’s or persons on bicycle’s. I have not received any fines while they are stopping the people but the camera is always “catching” me even if I am  driving below 80 km/hour.

Please advice.

I am residing in Cape Town and being a victim of these mobile cameras.

I know Municipalities don’t own this companies who are responsible for mobile speed cameras.

This is one of the money making scheme, NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT.

We can’t continue with these fraudulent control measures.

This is a good job that you are doing by informing me and others about this people.

I wish you can nationalize this and inform all South Africans.

Just to add to the topic.

I have seen cameras being hidden by trees and jackets.

I notice this because I was driving a normal speed and wondered what was that.

I am residing in Cape Town and being a victim of these mobile cameras.

I know Municipalities don’t own this companies who are responsible for mobile speed cameras.

This is one of the money making scheme, NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT.

We can’t continue with these fraudulent control measures.

This is a good job that you are doing by informing me and others about this people.

I wish you can nationalize this and inform all South Africans.

Just to add to the topic.

I have seen cameras being hidden by trees and jackets.

I notice this because I was driving a normal speed and wondered what was that.

Excellent site but by the way the Aarto website....suspended....makes you think

Regards and well done

Hi all,

Please add me to your mailing list.

I would like to ask a question. I have received a fine for driving over 120 kmh between Beyers Naude and 14th Avenue (80km Construction Zone) and have been asked to appear in court. But the reason for speeding was because a construction truck that was driving ahead of me was dropping stones and other gravel which cracked my Windshield and damaged my car, so I accelerated to get away and that is how I got fined. Can I fight this?

Please let me know,

Thanks for a great site and an even better service.

Hi all

Sheez, what a world we are forced to live in.  Not only do they trap you on every corner but they also discriminate against the poor ppl that have old cars, and I say this as they see you as a target because they know you are the ones that cannot afford to fix your old car and will also be the ones that will have to fork out a bribe of R20 of R50 or what amount ever they agree to, even as bad as a 2Liter coke, just to ensure that you don't get your car taken aways for cracked windshield or for going 10km's over the speedlimit. 

So bad are the cops (metro) that we have to deal with on a daily basis that they have brought in laws to protect you from being physically abused as a women.  That is just so absurd. Please take away their priviledge to bribe us out of the little bit of money we have left after the corrupt councils who don't fix our roads with the money they make on shitty fines.

Annie.