Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law


City of Tempe Police read a measuring wheel to determine photo radar sign distances on 10/9/2009.

City of Tempe Police read a measuring wheel to determine photo radar sign distances on 10/9/2009.

Tempe Police were called mid-Friday after CameraFRAUD activists observed a “photo radar” van breaking the law.

The van, owned and operated by beleaguered Redflex Group, often surveils drivers eastbound on Elliot Road near the Loop 101.

CameraFRAUD activists measured out the spacing of the signs to determine they were not in compliance with the law, which specifies the warning sign closest to the photo radar van be must be placed “approximately 300 feet” away:

At least two signs shall be placed in a location before a photo enforcement system. One sign shall be in a location that is approximately three hundred feet before the photo enforcement system.

Tempe Police confirmed the sign was posted at 743ft, and the van was removed from operational status pending the investigation. In addition, both of the warning signs appeared to be placed deliberately behind trees and shrubs, preventing proper notification to oncoming traffic as required.

Despite the clear violation of the law, no immediate citation was issued by Tempe Police to the Australian company. The fate of any “notices of violation” generated by the van while it operated outside of the law (more than usual) remains unclear, with the expectation that the burden of “guilty until proven innocent” applies even in the event of municipal and vendor error.

79 Responses to Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law

  1. Ron says:

    Oh, those pesky laws about following the rules..

  2. Jokn says:

    Boy oh Boy must be bitch when you have to follow the law how about fines for break’in the “LAW”

  3. LoneWolf says:

    Hiding signs behind the bushes? Why would the operator do such a thing? This wouldn’t have something to do with “MONEY” now, would it?

  4. who says:

    Right. Move the signs and then call the police. I call shenanigans.

    • Matt says:

      Wow. Really? RETARD.

    • Righteous Indignation says:

      Yah, someone would really do that “who” with dozens of cars going by that could witness someone moving the signs…

      I’ll see your RETARD Matt, and raise you a TOTALLY DESPERATE!!! what a loser this “who” guy is…

      As far as RF goes… “Live by the sword, Die by the sword” seems to come to mind.

      • who says:

        totally desperate is moving some van signs then calling the police. Or justs some kids or pedestrians, which there are alot of in tempe.. just screwing around. Desperate is CF making such a big deal of it blaming it on the camera company.

        • Dr Jett says:

          Who,
          Do you believe that all citizens should act like you and complain when HUGE FOREIGN CORPORATIONS VIOLATE OUR LAWS. You appear to me as a straight up PUNK. Did someone cut off your balls? Don’t you believe in FREEDOM? Or, are you so naive that you actually believe what you say? If you lived in a Communist country, your statements would keep you out of trouble. Let me clue you in to reality: THIS IS AMERICA.
          FUCK FOREIGN CORPORATIONS TRYING TO RUN OUR LIVES. GET OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!!! DON’T TREAD ON US!!! THIS IS WHAT OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON AND THE REASON WE EXIST.

          • Ernest Hater says:

            You said it. Who is obviously a balless bast…!

            • who says:

              I bet if I called any of you the names that I’ve been called here, I would have been banned quickly. When someone opposes your views you resort to calling nasty names like school yard bullies? That’s what people do when they have nothing intelligent to say. I haven’t called anyone here nasty names.

              • Dr Jett says:

                Who,
                I call em as I see them. I can’t believe that you really believe what you state here unless there is something seriously wrong with you or you work for Redfux like ETB. ETB BTW wished me dead, but I don’t care what people think if I say something considered politicallyincorrect. Reading the endless list of the violations committed by Redfux and ATS should make it clear to anyone with a brain.

            • LoneWolf says:

              Who, that’s BS. You’re other friend, ETB was the one who started calling everyone clowns.

    • Stacey says:

      Wouldn’t the video from the van show that?

    • Walter says:

      Lets see. The van has 24/7 video capabilities. So it would be kinda hard to move a sign without being videotaped doing it now wouldn’t it? Unless of course the van was hidden behind the trees, And the signs were also hidden in the trees. In an obvious attempt to conceal them from passing motorists. But even then someone would have had to drag them out of the trees and down the sidewalk. And into the view of the cameras in order to move them.

  5. Dr Jett says:

    I’m sure that Redfux just wanted to fux some innocent citizens out of some $$$$$$$$$$$$. I think all foreign companies should do as they please in our country. Surely they generate more REVENUE than the average citizen, so Redfux thinks that they deserve more privileges than the rest of us. Cops don’t hesitate to give citizens tickets for any minor infraction. How about a ticket for FRAUD. Oops, the cops would be implicated as partners along with the legislators. That might give the wrong impression about the purpose for Photo Radar; FRAUD !!!

  6. Jokn says:

    DR JETT YOU SAID IT…….GO CAMERA FRAUD GO

  7. Walter says:

    As far as the police were concerned. There have been no other “official” reports of Redflex violating this law. So according to them, This was a first time offence. If it becomes a reoccurring problem. Meaning if more people call the police and report when the signs are not properly displayed. Then the police will be more willing too look into giving citations or taking other forms of action.

    So we need too start carrying a long tape measure, And a camera. And call the police to document and report every time there is a signage violation.

  8. RPr says:

    Another State rep. signed the Initiative!

  9. J.E. Andreasen says:

    No other “official” reports, huh! I’ve personally called TPD at least a half-dozen times in the past few months on this conduct. I always give details, name, contact number, etc.

    As an example; Redflex vans like to hide in an alley/garbage truck pull-out on Northbound frontage (Price Road) between Southern & Broadway. They can hide the vehicle so well that you can’t see it ’till you are 30 feet away. Then, (at best) they place the sign at the RH edge of the sidewalk about 50 feet back, or worse, the skip the signs altogether. Southbound, they set up in a driveway common to two duplex’s and set signs the same way.

    In Mesa, the speed vans like to set up within a row of parked cars at about 1000 S. Center, and place the signs about 100′ (4-5 cars) before the van. Or, they skip the signs. These episodes also spurred calls from me.

    What would constitute an “official” report? Maybe writing it out with a Sharpie on the Chief’s buttocks?

    • Walter says:

      You have too call the police and demand a full long form report. You have to stay there for the cop to show up. And tell him that you want the van operator sited. Then you need too go get a copy of the report. Once you have a couple reports the cop will have to do something.

      Even if the cop does not do anything on the spot. At least they will get tired of having too come out because Redflex can’t follow the rules and they will eventually do something internally.

      • who says:

        I would bet that more like the cops would stop caring about the calls about so many baloney claims. Twice, I have seen someone setting up the vans and taking pictures of their signs and placement of the signs and also the vans. They even took pictures of the speedlimit sign behind the van.
        Ya’ll got to realize, that obviously they will be doing all they can to document their process, and the more people call complaining about stuff that documentation proves wrong… well of course those calls are gonna eventually be blown off.
        It’s probably already to the point that they laugh off complaint calls. But hey, keep it up, you’ll only make your case worse.

        • LoneWolf says:

          I don’t think there’s anything they can do to prove that they did everything right. They lost a majority of the peoples’ trust a long time ago.

          If they’re laughing off complaint calls, be rest assured someone will find out and blow the whistle on them. Such stupidity on their part could cost them their contract, lawsuits against them, and maybe even some jail time if there’s any crime involved. I don’t know about the DPS, but I’m pretty sure the state would take something like this serious.

  10. Dr Jett says:

    I will print the picture from the Cruise on Central Camera Fraud Booth showing what OUR FELLOW CITIZENS think of Scameras. They are lined up signing our petition and two of the men in the picture are registering to vote because they want to help vote the scameras out of existence FOREVER. They don’t think it is OK for FOREIGN CORPORATIONS TO VIOLATE OUR LAWS AND GET POLICE PROTECTION TO DO IT.

  11. ed says:

    Altho you are completely right with the statute as for distance, these tickets are civil not criminal, so to say innocent until proven guilty doesn’t apply here. The burden is a simple preponderance. The assumption would be not responsible until proven responsible.

    • none says:

      actually, it’s not a matter of “proof” of responsibility. Preponderance is one drop of water more in the Judge’s “I think you’re responsible” bucket than “I think you’re not responsible.”

      So, in essence, you are guilty upon accusation unless you have a mountain of evidence to change the mind of the judge, who has more than likely received “training” from the companies that install the cameras.

  12. denialator says:

    If signs are required to warn drivers you will be monitoring their speed and obedience to the rules, what’s the point of having photo radar vans? It would only be the deaf, dumb and blind who would be caught in such entrapment schemes. It makes no sense.

    • jgunn says:

      I thought the point of the vans was to slow people down, not to have people slam on their brakes and cause accidents. Hence why they have signs to warn drivers so panic stops don’t happen. But I guess you have other priorities like how to get as many people caught unawares and have more $$$ in the coffers. Sounds like you could care less about having less accidents.

      • Stacey says:

        The fact that they have signs just reinforces what you said, people slam on their brakes when they see the cameras.

        • who says:

          The fact that there’s warning signs and people still get notices, doesn’t say much about the people who get them now does it? And, Stacey.. you of all know the signs are required by law and have nothing to do with people slamming on their brakes.
          This slamming on brakes thing is getting so old. Of all the miles I drive, about 100 freeway miles everyday… I still haven’t seen someone slam on their brakes, or a rear-ender caused by a van.
          What I have seen and experienced though is a much more peaceful drive. Even switching lanes is much less stressful due to the fact that people aren’t coming up on you at 90 miles an hour.

          • The drive is NOT more peaceful. It is much more dangerous. I and half of the other drivers are wearing masks or hiding their faces when driving by cameras and vans, which is MUCH more dangerous than just focusing on the roads. Additionally, rather than smooth traffic flowing a constant speed, I now have to contend with changing and various speeds as I pass by cameras. Again, a smooth traffic flow at any speed (85th percentile) is MUCH safer than interrupted and varying speeds caused by the cameras. This is why accident rates increase when cameras are installed.

          • guttersn1pe says:

            I pass 2 fixed sites (and usually 1 mobile site) each day and if you don’t see brake lights then you’re not paying attention.

            Funny thing, my co-worker who is a camera supporter admitted she has trouble changing lanes around the camera zones as everyone is going the same speed. When speeds differ, holes in traffic open up and she can change lanes more easily.

            Just an interesting observation.

            • who says:

              Ya, it sucks when you look behind you, check your mirrors, signal to get over, see it’s clear, and right as you start to get over someone blows inches past you at a high speed, in the lane you were just moving into.
              Not much of a problem like it used to be though

            • That doesn’t happen if you look over your shoulder and see if anyone’s coming. Don’t be a lzy driver and this won’t be a problem.

  13. jgunn says:

    Redflex broke the law right when they started with using uncertified radar devices, what makes anyone think they would start complying with law now? Especially when their breaking the law is so much more profitable? They are from Australia and don’t give 2 s—s about US law unless they can profit from it.

    http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2008/12/01/story7.html

    “The lawsuit, filed in November, claims Redflex rolled out two radar systems for speed-enforcement cameras in the U.S. that had not received approval from the Federal Communications Commission.

    ATS’ lawsuit alleges that Redflex would have continued to use the cameras had ATS not questioned its competitor on deployment of the system for a statewide project — a contract worth at least $20 million awarded to Redflex by the Arizona Department of Public Safety.”

  14. Derek says:

    As of Sept. 30, 2009 all first responder vehicles in Arizona are exempt from any citations related to photo enforcement anyway. I’m sure photo radar vehicles are technically classified as such. SB1320 was signed by Brewer on 7/13/09. Here is the excerpt:28-1202. Exemption; first responders
    A VEHICLE IN USE BY A FIRST RESPONDER IN THE LINE OF DUTY IS EXEMPT FROM ANY ENFORCEMENT ACTION OR MEASURE RESULTING FROM A PHOTO ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM.

    • Stacey says:

      So, does this affect police in the city too, or just on the highways?

    • A photo radar vehicle is not a “first responder.” What are they responding to? A call for revenue?

    • Camera Hater says:

      I’d also say that Redfux are polluted by the whole fanatical unaccountable approach to road laws here in Australia. I’ve just got back here after a month in the States and its like coming back to the Soviet Union. Not only are Australia’s roads third world by comparison, but the more reasonable tolerances and lower level of zealotry in enforcement in the US make for a much more pleasant drive. Oh, and at the risk of sounding unpatriotic, it is VERY obvious when you get to the States that a higher proportion of drivers have done proper driver ed in schools – better car control, more capable maneuvring and (believe it or not) much more courtesy.

    • guttersn1pe says:

      First responders are law enforcement and fire services. Redflex and ATS are neither, therefore no more of a first responder than I am.

  15. Jokn says:

    Does this mean that in a chase or if backing up a OFFICER on a 911 call he (or) she will have to slow or stop in responding……..????? IE.. 2ND OFFICER OR 3RD.

  16. Derek says:

    It doesn’t say that that you have to be ‘responding’ to anything. Merely operating the vehicle. Funny how I never saw this on the news anywhere aout the passage of this new law.

  17. Stacey says:

    Well, thew media never said anything about cdl holders getting points either.

  18. Jason says:

    Where can you get one of those long tape measures at? I guess I will start pulling over and making sure these tax/theft devices are following simle rules. Also, if anyone knows, please post regarding any violation of the law to get out of your vehicle on the side of the highway….

    Thanks,

    Jason

  19. Will Kay says:

    Is Jay (ETB, LAB) in time out again?

  20. Walter says:

    You can get them at any home improvement store. Home depot or Lowe’s both carry them. You can get a fiberglass tape in lengths from 100′-300′. Or you can get the fancy wheels like the cop had.

    I also have a laser range finder. I don’t even have to get out of my truck. Just pull up beside the sign and “shoot” the van with the laser and presto…The exact distance in an instant.

    You will only be there for a few minutes. I would not worry about getting stopped. If you do I would tell them the truth. If they have a problem with it you can easily make them look bad for harassing you for checking it out.

    • Chris says:

      The laser units carried by some motor officers can also measure distance. Makes doing the measurements after an accident that much easier!

  21. Ernest Hater says:

    I love this civil disobedience. It makes these companies, dps, and the courts look like the fools that they are and brings them to the light of the general public.

    Keep up the good work!!!

    • Dan G says:

      Ernest Hater, I love this display too, but it’s hardly disobedience! As far as I know, and I could be wrong, there are no laws against measuring distances on the side of a road on say a sidewalk or something like that.

  22. klesb says:

    YE GODS! Stay off the shoulders! They are unsafe for humans! There is already enough evidence to contact the people you voted into office to represent YOU! If they do not act to remove this profit-oriented business, vote them out! It is not promoting safety when the citizens, at the risk of their lives, have to do the law enforcement of these jackals! And, investigate who is giving your representative campaign funds! That is usually the way these things get implemented.

  23. Raymond says:

    28-654. Photo enforcement zones; signage; standards; citation dismissal
    A. Except as provided in subsection F of this section, every local authority or agency of this state using a photo enforcement system shall adopt standards and specifications that indicate to a person operating a motor vehicle that a photo enforcement system is present and operational.
    B. The standards and specifications adopted pursuant to subsection A of this section shall include both of the following:
    1. At least two signs shall be placed in a location before a photo enforcement system. One sign shall be in a location that is approximately three hundred feet before the photo enforcement system. Placement of additional signs shall be more than three hundred feet before a photo enforcement system to provide reasonable notice to a person that a photo enforcement system is present and operational.
    2. Signs indicating a photo enforcement system shall be removed or covered when the photo enforcement system is no longer present or not operating.
    C. Signs erected by a local authority or agency of this state as prescribed in this section shall contain a yellow warning notice and correlate with and as far as possible conform to the system set forth in the most recent edition of the manual on uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways adopted by the director pursuant to section 28-641.
    D. If the standards and specifications prescribed pursuant to this section are not in effect during the operation of a photo enforcement system, the court may dismiss any citation issued to a person who is identified by the use of the photo enforcement system.
    E. During the time a vehicle containing photo enforcement equipment is being used to identify violators of this article and article 6 of this chapter, the rear of the vehicle shall be clearly marked to indicate that the vehicle is functioning as a photo enforcement vehicle. This subsection does not apply to a vehicle that does not contain a photo enforcement system and that is used by a law enforcement officer.
    F. Subsection B of this section does not apply to a mobile photo enforcement vehicle during the time a mobile photo enforcement vehicle is deployed on streets with a posted speed limit of forty miles per hour or less.

  24. […] / -0  0 score      Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law City of Tempe Police read a measuring wheel to determine photo radar sign distances on 10/9/2009. […]

    • duece says:

      well sounds like you are happy that DPS is laying off hundreds. I guess you all can drive really fast and run red lights and not be accountable for your actions.

    • guttersn1pe says:

      It’s unfortunate to see people losing jobs. I’d expect the civilian ranks within DPS will be the hardest hit.

      So you don’t need to worry deuce, DPS officers will still be out there doing whatever it is they do. But if you want a copy of your accident report, that will probably take 2-3 weeks longer.

    • I’m guessing they’re doing this because there’s no need to have 4 DiPShit cars and an evel knievel hanging out and discussing a MINOR 2 car wreck on the side of the freeway.

  25. guttersn1pe says:

    I’m still waiting for Redflex to argue that 743 feet IS approximately 300 feet.

    Did anyone get pix of the signage?

    • who says:

      were still on this move the signs then call the police bit? Someone from CF just coincidentally being there is like a fart. You smelt it you dealt it.

      • LoneWolf says:

        Don’t play the blame game, who. There’s nothing stopping you from moving the signs yourself so you could come back here and blame it on CF. We know you want to see CF go down just as bad as we want to see the scameras go down.

        • who says:

          You want to see the camera’s go down so bad there’s nothing to stop you from moving the signs then calling the police.

          • LoneWolf says:

            Who, trust me, we’re not in the business of framing people. Did you see the video of that one bad PR van driver which was taken by one of our members? Can you blame his illegal driving on us? You’re the one who’s so concerned about us framing and blaming so you’re really beginning to make me wonder….

        • Perhaps that’s the problem. Since when is a “mobile” sign a good idea? Don’t Arizona drivers deserve REAL signs that can’t be moved anyway?

  26. duece says:

    dont speed

    • LoneWolf says:

      Be sure you come back here later and let us know how many drivers followed your command.

    • Dr Jett says:

      Deuce,
      Scameras only use speeding as an excuse to violate YOUR RIGHTS AND OURS. Illegal surveilance of SUPPOSEDLY FREE CITIZENS is unethical in a free society. Think of how our government has trampeled on our rights using the Patriot Act as one example of BIG BROTHER using any excuse to monitor its population to CONTROL US. WAKE UP BEFORE ITS TOO LATE LIKE IN NAZI GERMANY.

  27. Cathy says:

    Those meddling Arizona Revised Statutes are just minor, easily-dismissable glitches standing in the way of all that revenue. Thank goodness for ethic-less judges and paid-off, underqualified magistrates!

    (The cameras are coming down.)

    • Subversive Menace says:

      Who is a manipulator who thinks by using fear mongering we will listen to him and change our tactic. Wrong. Every tactic camerafraud has used has been effective.

  28. […] on the Westbound Loop 101 at Scottsdale Rd. CameraFraud has documented over 5 violations so far: Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law Redflex: Crooked Company, Crooked Signs Redflex Violates State Law Regarding Signage… Again! […]

  29. Goedkoop verhuizen…

    […]Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[…]…

  30. best carry holster…

    […]Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[…]…

  31. buy hermes bags uk Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law | CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down

  32. hermes purse replica Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law | CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down

  33. cheap birkin bag china Redflex Photo Van Caught Violating State Law | CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: