San Francisco Red Light Camera Tickets
UPDATE 10/19/2005: 9 months after the ticket, I got the appeal decision in the mail. I won!
Like many cities in California, San Francisco has been using Automated Enforcement Systems (a.k.a. “Red Light Cameras”) at many of its intersections for several years now. Although the stated purpose is (of course) for safety, the real reason is revenue. If you are the unlucky recipient of one of the citations in the mail (as yours truly recently was) then this website is for you. It explains your options and relates my experience with the San Francisco court system.
Your choices:
- The picture isn’t of you. The registered owner is who gets sent the ticket. If the picture is not of you, sign the attached affidavit saying that the picture isn’t of you. Don’t lie — you’re saying under the penalty of purjury that it’s not you in the ticket. DO NOT, however, TELL THEM WHO IS IN THE PICTURE. It’s their job to figure that out, not yours. Don’t rat out your friends and family.
- Pay it. If $371 is worth less to you than a lost morning in court, then just pay the ticket and move on. You may or may not want to do traffic school to keep the points from appearing on your license. While I’ve never done it myself, I hear the on-line version of traffic school is fairly painless.
- Trial + Traffic school. This is probably the best option for most people. Go to the clerk. Post bail (the amount of your ticket) and plead not-guilty. Get a time for trial. SHOW UP ON TIME. When the court session starts, the clerk will allow you to have your fine reduced to only $50 if you take traffic school (with a $30 fee). For a total of $80, you’re done and the points are not added to your license. NOTE: If you’ve already done traffic school in the past 18 months, you’re not eligible to do it again. Sorry.
- Plead not-guilty. Lots of options here. You can skip the arraignment and demand your right to a speedy trial (within 45 days) by going to the clerk and posting the $371 bond. Sometimes, due to the short notice, the officer isn’t properly subpoenaed and won’t know that he/she needs to testify against you (this happened in my case). If the officer doesn’t appear to testify, your case is dismissed. Or, the officer could already be in court to testify against other people and will realize that she needs to testify against you too, and will testify anyway (yep, this happened to me).Or, you can go to your arraignment and plead not-guilty there. This gives you the chance to make pre-trial motions. This makes the process very drawn-out — expect your trial date to be many months in the future.
Pleading not-guilty
NOTE WELL: This takes a lot of time and will really try your patience. DO NOT EXPECT TO WIN. In fact, you should expect to lose. Sorry, but the trial court for traffic and other infractions in San Francisco assumes GUILT. Moreover, the red light camera systems are considered infallible and therefore beyond reproach. AGAIN, YOU WILL LOSE.
Don’t waste your time
- People often say that with traffic cases you should plead not-guilty and take your chances that the officer won’t show up. (If the officer doesn’t show up, your case is immediately dismissed.) I would agree with this strategy for all non-red light camera tickets. However, from what I can tell, the officers assisting with the red light camera prosecutions do not have normal police “beats”, and instead have a desk job, probably in the same building. This means they have a high liklihood of showing up.
- If you are planning to contend that you don’t run red lights, you are a safe driver, and you’ve never done it before, do not waste your time. (Most murderers haven’t murdered anyone before, either.) You will be found GUILTY. Your fine will be lowered to $300, but they won’t grant you traffic school. You are better off taking the $80 buy-off deal mentioned above.
- If you are planning to contend that the light was really yellow and the camera was wrong or broken, DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME. You will be found GUILTY. I promise. Don’t forget the the cameras are considered infallible by the trial court judge. Even if it was broken!
Argue the law
While the cameras themselves might be considered infallible, the city has errored in the way they are set up and operated. You should expect to LOSE at trial even if you object to the evidence on these grounds. HOWEVER, these MAY help you get your ticket overturned in appeal. That’s right, if you want any chance of winning, you will have to APPEAL. This takes a lot of time and energy. If you’re fed up and willing to put in the time it takes to appeal, then go ahead and plead not-guilty. Otherwise, don’t waste your time and take the $80 buy-out deal.
What to do:
- Buy the book Fight Your Ticket in California from Nolo Press. Make sure you get thee one specifically for California.
- Go to the Hall of Justice (850 Bryant St.) with a copy of your citation many weeks before your trial. Parking hint: You can park on 6th street after 9am. so show up at 8:59 and you’ll have all the free parking you want. Otherwise you might have to pay the garages that charge $6 for the first 1/2 hour. Go to the 5th floor, turn right at the hallway, and go to the end. This is the Police Legal department. Tell the friendly officers (really, they have always been very friendly in this office) that you want to fill out an “Informal discovery request”. They will give you a short form. Fill it out, and the City’s “Photo prosecution packet” will be sent to you. This is exactly what they will present at trial, which is always a good thing to have beforehand.
Issues:
(For a good overview of many of these issues, read Highwayrobbery.net).
- The city has not property issued warning tickets as required by 21455.5. CVC (California vehicle code) 21455.5 allows cities to put up Automated Enforcement Systems if they follow the guidelines set forth in the statue. One of the statutes is that “Prior to issuing citations under this section, a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days.” While most cities (I believe San Francisco is included) took this to mean warning tickets only needed to be issued 30 days before the first camera in a city, a recent court ruling in Southern California mandated that EACH camera is succeptible to the 30-day rule. At trial, I suggest asking the prosecution’s witness (the officer) if they issued only warning tickets for the first 30 days of YOUR camera’s operation.
- CVC 21455.5 also has very strict requirement with respect to intersection signage. 21455.5(a) basically says the city has to label an AES-enabled intersection from all sides. There is one exception: if they choose not to label the intersection from all sides, then it can “posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes.” Note that San Francisco DOES NOT post the required signs on major city entrances like bridges, freeways, and state highway routes. Instead, they choose to label major freeway exits. This is not compliant with the letter or the spirit of the law. While some AES-enforced intersections ARE labeled with signage in all direction, many are completely un-labeled meaning the city is falling back on the fact that they think they’ve labeled the “freeways, bridges, and state highway routes”. If you bring this up at trial (as I did) expect to LOSE. By bringing it up at trial, though, you can use it in your appeal.
- Interesting pre-trial motions. Present them at your arraignment. They probably won’t work, but might be useful ammunition during your appeal.
- Try to subpoena the camera’s “source code”. The camera is more than a camera. It’s a computer. You have the right to question your accuser in court. Your accuser is this computer. You should have the right to know exactly how it is programmed. If this motion is granted, you will probably never see the “source code” (it’s a trade secret) and therefore I would expect the prosecution to drop the charges. It’s worth a shot. It will probably help your case if you know how (ie have the credentials) to interpet any “source code” that you might receive.
- The camera is disallowed under California’s “Speed trap” laws. This is a very interesting one, and will take further research. CVC 40801 forbids speed traps in California. “What does this have to do with Red Light Cameras?” you might ask. Well, let me tell you. CVC 40801 says “No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.” CVS 40802 says “A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.” What does this mean to you? Well, the Red Light Computer decided to take a picture of you because you were headed for the intersection at a rate of speed high enough to assume that you were going to go past the ’stop line’. It knew this because there are coils of wire in the pavement in each lane that are a set distance apart. It calculated your speed by securing the time it takes your vehicle to travel the known distance. Sound familiar? CVC 40801 now says they can’t use this evidence to prosecute you. But they did anyway, and now you have grounds to fight it. I didn’t try this angle, but I have a feeling you’ll LOSE if you do. But I want to hear about how it went, so write to me.
I’d love to hear from you. Write to me at aren /at/ thesandersens dotcom with your experiences.
August 31st, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Hi,
I just received my citation in the mail, it is four years after this was first published so tickets are up to $436. I had a question. I plan on going to court to go through with the “Trial+Traffic School method”. What if I AM guilty can I still plead not guilty and just expect to get the fine lowered. If I go to court and they ask me why I pleaded not guilty what to you say? I’m not sure this will work. I’m wondering if you could provide me with any details. The second bullet of “Don’t waste you time” seems to contradict “Trial + Traffic School”.
Thanks for any feed back and thanks for posting this blog its the only thing I’ve been able to find on the subject.
August 31st, 2009 at 9:50 pm
At the very beginning of the trial session I was at, they offered the lower fine and traffic school if you didn’t pursue the case.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I was visiting San Fran from Ohio for the first time and had a rental vehicle for five days. I had just got the car from the Airport and was headed to the hotel when I took a wrong turn in downtown San Fran. In my attempt to get to the hotel I remember going through a yellow light which switched to red as I went through and a “flash” of light appeared. A month after my return home I received a “affidavit processing fee” from Hertz via ATS Processing Services asking for $30.00, I’ve mailed the check and awaiting the “Red Light Violation”. However, I had been told that as long as I was already past the “white line/cross walk” that this should have precludes any violation. Please give me your thoughts. Thank you for your time, Rob
September 27th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
In theory, the cameras will not take a photo unless you crossed the “white line” too late. The photos will probably show that you didn’t make it in time. Hertz is already in receipt of the citation and I would expect you to get your copy soon.
There are some very interesting ways to fight it but none of them are useful if you’re in Ohio. You might just have to pay this one. Let me know what the citation shows when it arrives.
October 7th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Hi, I recently got a red light ticket and was considering the signage argument from VC 21455.5 that you mentioned above. However, I noticed that you said that you lost at trial with that argument. But I also noticed that you won your appeal, so I curious if you won using that same argument or a different one. You help is appreciated!
October 7th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Matt: I won at appeal due to a technicality. The lower court didn’t submit the paperwork properly, and the appeals court threw out the case instead of trying it on its merits (or lack thereof).
October 8th, 2009 at 1:40 am
Do you know ahy thing about the 15 day requirement as per CVC 40518? My ticket was mailed after the ‘Respond to the court by date.’ In fact, it was mailed 30 days after the violation date. Any input?
October 8th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Keith –
I have lots of info on that. I fought a ticket on those grounds which was ultimately dismissed for other reasons. I’ll send you some info.
October 14th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
Hi – I recently got a red light ticket, however, the picture on the ticket as well as the picture online is extremely blurry. When I went to the court on my due date I told them that I would like a trial. At the court, the clerk asked me if I was driving the car and I told him that this was my car but that I cannot tell in the picture if that is me or not.
Are there other, better pictures that the police have at their disposal? How should I address this in court?
October 15th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Hey i received a rolling right ticket. I had no clue this was illegal, i always thought you had to yield, i just follow what i see other drivers do. Anyhow i was wondering if i could fight this because the law states that you have 15 days to mail the ticket certified mail. Well it took 16 days and there was no certified mail, i didnt sign for anything and there was no proof of delivery. Can i fight this, can you email me please?
October 17th, 2009 at 4:37 pm
Hi, thanks for running this blog! I just got a red light ticket but since I changed my address I think I’ve only received one of the Citation reminders. Is there a way to look at the picture(s)/video online? Or do I have to go to court to get that information?
Thanks,
Daniel
October 19th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
I was in SF recently and in the right turn lane and realized that I saw a red light camera flashed infront of me. But I did not make a right turn and I was just happened to cross the white line about half car length. I did not make that right turn until the light turned green. It’s been a week and I have no receive anything yet in the mail because I had a rental car. I am not so sure if i violated the law and I was just crossed the white line just a little bit. Any thought? Thanks a bunch!
October 20th, 2009 at 12:11 am
Oleg: The police have better pictures. You can call the Red Light Enforcement division of the Police Department and ask to see them.
Anthony: I don’t recommend fighting your ticket.
Daniel: Call the courthouse clerk and ask them for the case #. Then call the Red Light Enforcement division and ask to see the photos. It might be too late, though. If you failed to appear at court, then you are guilty and have additional fines to pay.
Jason: Technically you ran the stop light. 1/2 car length is a lot. The camera takes two pictures within 1 second. You have a good chance of being forgiven if the second picture shows that you stayed on your side of the intersection. The tickets take up to 3 weeks to arrive, but will be further delayed because it was a rental car. If you haven’t heard anything in 2 months, you’re probably off of the hook.
October 20th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Thanks for the info Aren! It wasn’t that far off 1/2 car length. I think it was enough to trigger the line on the ground, so I think my front tires just stepped over it. How did you know the info about the camera takes two pictures within 1 second? And also I have chance to be forgiven? Do you think there’s also video camera recorded? I hope I won’t get it, it was just an accident that I just stepped over a line. Really appreciate your input!
October 24th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
HI Aren thanks for your help to people like me. Today I was in S.F and light was green.I was behind one car that was making left turn and I changed my line to right to pass that car and light suddenly changed to yellow when I was in the middle of intersection and camera took my photo when i was almost done crossing. What can you tell about it? What should I do? Thank you very much again.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Jason: as far as I know, SF does not use video-enabled cameras. Wait 2 weeks. If you get nothing in the mail, then you’re off the hook
AlexM: from your description, it sounds like the cameras were taking pictures of someone behind you. The cameras only monitor the ’stop’ line. If you enter the intersection on a green or yellow light, the cameras won’t be interested in photographing you since there’s nothing illegal about that. Unless, of course, you get a citation in the mail in 3 weeks.
November 1st, 2009 at 10:30 pm
I received a right on red ticket. It was 2:46 in the morning and I was tired. Would the judge understand that and possibly let me off the hook?
You say that there is an option for traffic school (for which I am eligible) and I only have to pay an $80 fee…is that still the case?
Just looking for advice! Thanks!
November 1st, 2009 at 11:02 pm
The judge definitely will not dismiss the ticket for that reason. You will get a slight reduction in fine amount for showing up in court, though.
I haven’t heard if the $80 option is still being offered.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Aren -
thanks for keeping this site running and up-to-date. Lots of good info.
With regard to a San Francisco red light camera ticket:
On your reply of August 29, 2009, you indicate: “At the very beginning of the trial session I was at, they offered the lower fine and traffic school if you didn’t pursue the case.” I assume this relates to an earlier year (2005?).
Has anyone recently (late 2009) tried the “Trial & Traffic School” option with the court clerk on the trial date offering a reduced fine at the start of the court session? Does this still work? What was the “reduced” fine? (Currently fine is at $446 for a VC21453A citation).
Thanks!
November 9th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Has anyone else recently tried the “Trial & Traffic School” method?
Results?
November 12th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
I too just received a red light camera ticket – at Park Presidio and Lake coming out of the tunnel. i understand this is a very popular place for tickets. They got me at .3 seconds. I literally had no time to safely stop between the time the yellow light was actually visible and when it turned red.
Like the above poster, I’d like to get the $446 citation reduced. Do I contest the ticket via mail, then show up for the court date and hope they will offer a reduced fee? I’ll be happy to do online traffic school too. I live in Monterey, and don’t mind showing up once if it means getting $300 knocked off the violation.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:42 am
for some 2009 info on SF traffic court procedures, go to http://www.yelp.com/biz/traffic-court-san-francisco
There is a 3/2/09 post by Alan L that is fairly thorough in describing the traffic court process.
November 17th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Hi Aren,
I was visiting SF and driving a Budget rental car on Sat Oct 17 in bumper-to-bumper traffic near Baker Beach. Normally I wouldn’t enter an intersection when there isn’t room to cross completely. However, in this case it was a very short T-shaped intersection and I was going with the flow of traffic when it came to a stop while I was inside the intersection. The light changed to red while I was in the intersection and I saw the camera flash.
Today I received a $25 Affidavit Processing Fee in the mail from ATS for Budget with a date of Nov 9. I haven’t gotten any sort of violation notice from SF, but I’m assuming that a processing fee means that a ticket has been issued. Is that a correct assumption? If I do get a ticket and fine assessment, I’m not going to fly back to CA to appear in court, but is there any possibility of getting the fine reduced, like attending online traffic school?
Thanks!
Cathy
November 17th, 2009 at 11:15 am
@Cap: Haven’t heard from anyone who has tried the “Trial & Traffic School” method lately.
@Mike: contact the courthouse clerk. Ask how to plead not-guilty via mail (and thereby forgo the arraignment), then show up for trial. They’ll probably make the best Trial + Traffic school offer immediatley before the session starts.
@Cathy: sounds very suspect. The camera’s aren’t designed to trigger in “stuck in the intersection” cases. Wait until you get the citation (assuming you ever do) and if it’s clear you were merely stuck in the intersection then you should do a trial by mail (trial by written declaration). You can’t attend online traffic school unless you’re a CA resident… and it doesn’t give you a discount anyway (it just keeps the points off of your license).
December 6th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
i got a flash this am, i was at 19th ave and sloat, i was rolling as the light was turning from red to green, nver actually going into the intersection, probably rolled to the cross walk, any thoughts whether i will get a ticket
i dont think i entered the intersection but the camera flashed twice
any thoughts?
December 6th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
I doubt you’ll get a ticket from what you described.
December 6th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Aren,
You seem to be the most knowledgeble on the whole red light camra, on the 26th of november I was making a right hand turn when the light was red, there are no postings of signs that say “no turn on red” anywhere at the intersection. When I turned I did slow down but the camera went off and on the 5th of december I got the ticket in the mail. First of all is it pointless to fight. Second does anyone know what the cost is for the violation. It happend in Stockton, CA the vehicle code is VC21453(a) description : failure to stop at Red Light. Let me know when you get a chance and anyone else for that matter that knows anything . Thank you.
December 9th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Hi, I was at 19th Ave and Sloat on Thanksgiving night (Nov 26). I rolled into the intersection and stopped due to traffic back up. The light was yellow when I went into the intersection (so I honestly think). But when I was half inside and looked again it was suddenly red. There was a series of blinding white light at that moment. Probably 3-5 flashes, one of which hit me close when I was close to getting out of the intersection. I only realized several minutes later that that must have been a red light camera. I first thought it was a beamer from a construction site, since it was so blindingly bright. There was no car behind me in the intersection waiting to get out, but there are three lanes in one direction, there could have been cars in the other lanes behind me which I don’t remember. Anyway, I hope I won’t get a ticket. Wouldn’t I have noticed the first flash right upon entering the intersection? Which I didn’t notice anything then? How long does it take to get at ticket by mail to the North Bay Area and how long do I have time to respond? I will be out of the country on vacation from Dec 16-Jan2 with my whole family. Nobody will have access to our PO Box. The car is even in my husband’s name, so he would get the ticket in his name. Hopefully not. Thanks so much for your help.
December 9th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
@Arielle — Doesn’t sound like the camera’s flashes were for you. A ticket will arrive within 15-20 days. Don’t worry about it, and if there’s one waiting for you when you get back… then we can figure out what to do.
December 9th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Hi!
Great site!. Just got a red-light camera ticket. Making a right turn. Looked at the video and I do stop for a half sec. before turning.
I want to fight! I want to post bail and request a speedy trial. Just got my notice almost a month later. Do you think the speedy trial thing would work in my case? Looks like you did something similar… This is in socal
December 14th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
So I saw the light….got the citation in the mail…
However my situation is a little different. The picture is sort of blurry, and it was in a company vehicle. The citation went to the corporate office, who then forwarded it to me. My name is not listed on the citation, but the company’s. Our vehicle leasing department sent the citation to my address, and now what?
As others have asked, is the $80 option for traffic school + trial still available? $446 does not sound good to me…from San Fran’s court website, it doesn’t mention the option, though I doubt they would…any updates would be great!
December 14th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
@Jake: Tickets issued in company names are much easier to get dismissed. Email the editor of highwayrobbery.net for his informational document on the subject.
December 15th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Aren,
My citation was for going Northbound on Park Presidio where I made a right turn onto Lake St.
I stopped briefly then proceeded to make my right turn. Again, there were no signs posted anywhere that there is no right turn on RED.
The photos show me stopping at 2.0secs in first photo. Then I was half into my turn at 4.1. Technically my car can reach up to 17mph in 1.x secs. Does this sound unreasonable to accuse me of a violation on those grounds?
December 15th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
@Sam: The camera read-out (assuming it’s a gatso camera) will tell you how fast you were going when you crossed the stop line. What does it say?
December 17th, 2009 at 11:49 am
I received a red light violation from an incident November 11 2009 in which it was not my Camry car and I was not the driver. The plate number in the photograph is from old plates turned in from my wife’s Toyata Avalon for personalized license plates in April 20, 2007. The Red Light Camera Clerk did not read down the DMV history profile correctly to ascertain these facts. I have stood in line twice at the Bryant Street San Francisco Traffic Division but no dismisal has been accomplished; instead I found out this morning the commissioner has to review the case and the date for that is Jan 4th, 2010.
Has mistaken identity happened before in your experience?
December 17th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
@Aren: There was a total of 4 photos.
1st – me behind the crosswalk with 2 other cars to my left the same
2nd – shows me halfway into the turn(speed shows 17mph)
3rd – license plate
4th – a blurry pic of my face
December 17th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
The second photo which shows the speed and me halfway into my turn. It shows 17mph.
December 17th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
@Arens: Furthermore… I can say my situation is also a “It’s not me” ticket. Any advice?
December 18th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Hi Aren,
I reside in So. California. I received a Redflex Red-Light Camera Ticket, making a left hand turn. The first photo registered a RED time of 0.08 while the second photo registered a RED time of 1.48 and Elapsed time of 1.39.
Are you aware of the full brightness or steady light defense mentioned on HighwayRobbery site. Any experience or thoughts on this. My late time of 8/100th of a second would adhere to their claim that my red light was not steady or in full illumination due to it takes at least one full second for the LCD to reach full brightness (steady) upon being triggered.
Thanks.
December 19th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
@Sam: sounds like a tough case. According to the camera equipement you crossed the stop line at 17 miles per hour. The judge won’t believe that you stopped. And as for your “it’s not me” defense — what do you mean? You said above that the photos were of you.
@Adam: I am familiar with that defense. I like the concept and it’s definitely worth a shot given how short your red light time was.
December 19th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Aren,
Thanks. One more question. Since my ticket is a photo red light ticket are you aware of a defendant’s rights in regards to subpoenas. Our town’s chief of police is the designated “Police Project Manager” in the city’s contract with Redflex. Since I can’t question a camara, I want to subpoena everyone involved with the Photo-Enforcement Project, from the police chief down to the Redflex personel involved in the evidence and processing of my ticket.
December 26th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
hi aren,
well, my ticket just came in the mail.
i remember the moment very clearly: i was heading westbound on harrison street about an hour before sundown — the angle of the sun at that hour put the traffic signal in TOTAL silhouette (it appeared black), plus the effect on my eyes was blinding. both of these factors made it impossible to discern the light color change.
the 1st photo — taken after the red light was on for .04 secs, if i’m reading the data correctly — shows me stopped before the 1st line of the crosswalk (meaning, not in the intersection), waiting for the stopped traffic in front of me to start moving again. you can see the stopped traffic on the other side of the intersection.
not sure if the photo link will work for you:
http://public.cite-web.com/ShowImage.asp?vFile=/PSSSQL_San/Sanfrancisco/Images/dep_136893/L2144E1D12172009154617I179121.JPG%20&vImageLable=Photo%20One%20%28Vehicle%20on%20the%20loops%29&vCitNum=za0258663
as soon as traffic in front of me started to move, i started to drive forward, unable to discern the traffic light color change because of the angle of the sun, & that’s when the photo was taken.
the 2nd photo shows me about 3/4 of the way through the intersection, with the front of my car about 1 foot from the crosswalk line:
http://public.cite-web.com/ShowImage.asp?vFile=/PSSSQL_San/Sanfrancisco/Images/dep_136893/L2144E1D12172009154617I179132.JPG%20&vImageLable=Photo%20Two%20%28Vehicle%20in%20the%20intersection%29&vCitNum=za0258663
my questions:
1) do you feel that my ‘angle of sun’ argument would hold water?
2) do you think a photo of the silhouetted traffic light would help? of course, it won’t be able to capture the blinding effect on my eyes, but i’m hoping it may capture the blackened, silhouetted traffic light. i was planning on going there around the same time of day to see if i could capture if on camera. unfortunately, the angle will have to be a little different since i’ll have to take it from the sidewalk.
3) why was the camera even activated (pic #1) since i’d not even crossed the 1st (outside) line into the crosswalk? it’s my understanding that the camera is only activated once you’ve crossed the 2nd line into the intersection.
ok. hoping you can shed some light on this.
thanx,
michele
December 27th, 2009 at 7:28 pm
@Michele –
1) As difficult as it is to see a stoplight when the sun is behind it, it is almost certain a judge would not dismiss the ticket based on that.
2) Probably not.
3) You’re required to stop before the crosswalk.
Never hurts to try, though, so let me know what happens.
December 28th, 2009 at 10:05 am
thanx, aren.
re: #3
what i’m wondering is why the 1st photo was taken since i HAD stopped before the crosswalk?
thinking this will further prove that i couldn’t see the light color, since i had actually stopped before the crosswalk (pic #1), and then proceeded (even though the light had already been red) when the cars in front of me started moving. does that sound plausible?
was looking around on here & didn’t see a bio. found you elsewhere (if it is indeed you) and you appear to have an engineering background). do you have a legal background, or are you simply someone who’s received a lot of traffic citations?
thanx again.
December 29th, 2009 at 8:54 am
@Michele –
I am not a lawyer and any advice on here should not be construed as legal advice. The advice here is probably worth just about what you’re paying for it.
The problem with the “I stopped” argument is that the camera’s computers (whether correctly or incorrectly) calculated your speed as 19 MPH when you crossed the closest line to the crosswalk. It will be next to impossible to convince the commissioner that you stopped.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Hi Aren,
Any thoughts or comments to my last question?
Thanks
December 29th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
@Adam — Oops, didn’t mean to let that slip through the cracks. I don’t know of the subpoena rights for traffic infractions. A quick search shows that you legally have the right, but that the court clerk can deny your request (which, if I had to guess, they will [aside from the ticketing officer, which is automatic]). But try it anyway… there’s a form online (assuming California). You have to pay them $35 + mileage.
January 9th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I’m curious about the part about another driver using the car. What should the owner of the car expect for not naming the individual, given that their photocopied license is submitted and the drive was another gender, for example. Is this a loop hole in the system? Or will it only lead to more problems. Anyone?
January 10th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
@Rebecca –
You should expect the city to be happy to let you off of the hook, as long as you reveal who the driver was. Instead, you’ll have to go straight to trial (or a trial by written declaration) if you want to have it dismissed straight-away.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:43 am
Aren
Wow lots of information.
Question. How far through the intersection do you have to be to be safe? I was Approx in the middle of the crosswalk just as the light changed from yellow to red. Any thoughts info is appreciated, thanks
January 11th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
@Tim –
The law says the front of your car has to be behind the close side of the crosswalk (the stop line) when the light is red. The middle of the crosswalk is not a violation… unless the cameras are set up wrong or not working properly.
January 12th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Hi Aren,
In regards to Ca Vehicle Code 21455.5 (b) which requires the local jurisdiction to make a public announcement of the automated traffic enforcement system at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the enforcement program.
Do you have any knowledge or insight what constitutes “public announcement”? Are you aware of any cities which have or have not adhered to this code?
Thanks,
Adam
January 12th, 2010 at 8:13 pm
Aren
Thanks.
January 14th, 2010 at 11:58 pm
@Adam –
Great question. Many cities have only announced the installation of the city’s first camera, via tv, radio, and newspapers. There is debate as to whether that’s sufficient, or each camera needs a warning. If you ask SF for the discovery packet, I believe they will tell you how they chose to comply.
Also check Highwayrobbery.net — it goes much more in-depth.
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:26 pm
hi!, really good web page. so i got a ticket for jumping a red light. the pictures are extremely blurry (it was kind of drizzling), can i choose “affidavit of non-availability”. Is there an extra fine if they rule its me after they checkout my license and recent photograph? Also can you please elaborate on the Trial + Traffic schol option. I am confused on how its different from Plead not guilty option. For Trial + Traffic, when do i go there and see the clerk?
January 23rd, 2010 at 10:03 pm
@Naren — You can try the “affidavit of non-liability,” but if it *is* you then you’re commiting perjury. In theory that could involve jail time if they can prove it. You also have to give up someone else’s name to use it.
For Trial and Traffic school, just go down to the courthouse now and wait in line to talk to the clerk. Plead not-guilty with the clerk, and get a Trial date. At trial, they will probably offer the traffic school option.
January 23rd, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Thanks Aren!
January 26th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
So I went to the clerks office today and told the guy behind the counter that I want a trial date. He told me I have two options.
1. Post the bail and get a trial date.
2. Dont post the bail and go to the court two times. Once for arraignment and second time for trial ..or something like that.
So I took option 1 and posted the bail. He gave me a receipt and a court date.
Did i pick the correct option? What are my next steps?
The citation I got through the mail said I could make an appointment to check out the pictures so I asked the clerk before I was leaving about where I could do that. He told me I can check them online and when i replied that they are not clear, he said its the same pictures they are going to show and I might have a chance of winning because the picture isnt clear. All this took less than 30 minutes, even though the “Smart Parking” garage guy was trying to rip me off 10$ by telling me it was 32 minutes. I almost paid and when I checked the time on the ticket and his machine it was just under 30 minutes. I paid him 5$ for the half hour. What a jerk.
January 26th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Hi I got a red light ticket in california and was wondering how to go about it. I am going to go to court to see if they can lower my bail amount but was wondering do all courts lower ur bail and give you traffic school if u ask. I think 500 bucks is way to much even though I am guilty. Can u help me need the bail to be reduced and I may need traffic school.
January 27th, 2010 at 6:07 pm
@Naren — Yep, you did the right thing. Your court date is a Trial. Go to trial — BE ON TIME. They will probably offer the whole room of defendents a deal before the judge appears… you have to decide whether you are going to take their deal (probably a very reduced fine if you do traffic school) or forgo that deal and argue the pictures just aren’t clear enough to convict you. Please report back afterwards — would like to know what your experience was.
@Bethany — Every court is different. Most will lower bail for you when you appear before a Judge, though.
January 27th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
Is offering a deal pretty common? I am kind of paranoid because the clerk said i gave my right to traffic school by asking a trial date. i would be more than glad to take a reduced fine. from highwayrobbery.net i learnt that i could ask the judge if he was sure it was me from the pictures without agreeing to testify.
January 27th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
and yeah, i will post back on what i had to ..after the trial.
January 28th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
@Naren — Offering a deal before the trial starts is common. Once you’re at trial, the judge probably won’t let you do traffic school. If you lose, you’ll probably get a lower fine, but that’s it.
You can say the photos aren’t clear, etc., without taking the stand. If anyone asks if it’s you in the photo, you can say that per your 5th amendment right, you’re not going to testify.
January 31st, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Hello,
I just went through red light. I don’t have a front plate. does it take a picture of the back plate? The light changed so fast!
Thanks,
JP
February 1st, 2010 at 10:59 am
@JP: What city/intersection? If San Francisco, then probably not — most of the cameras in SF only take pictures from the front.
February 1st, 2010 at 8:56 pm
I got a camera red light ticket tonight at the intersection of ofarrel and franklin. it was yellow almost red when i was turning and i did see two flashes of light from the camera on the street corner.
if i do get a ticket, can u simplify for me what i need to do? i know uve explained the trial and traffic school option, but can even simplify it a bit more to me? what im getting is that i when i do get my citation or ticket, i go to the clerk and post bail (what does this mean?) and plead not guilty. and then u mentioned getting a time for the trial. will the trial be on the same day u show up to plead not guilty and post bail? AND who or what tells you when to go to the clerk to plead guilty?
im new to this so it’s kinda confusing for me.
thank you for this helpful site.
February 1st, 2010 at 9:42 pm
hi aren
i just read ur exchange with naren and that answered my questions.
a new question, however, is, how sure is it that they will offer a deal before trial starts? cos if they don’t offer a deal and the trial will start, what should one do now if they want the traffic school option?
February 2nd, 2010 at 7:07 pm
Hi Aren,
Do you have any information or insights about getting a traffic violation for making a (legal) right turn on red? The violation code is VC21453A and the description says “Fail to Stop at Red Signal.” The photos show my car at the crosswalk and then making the right turn. The red second says “0.4″
I believe I went into the turn on yellow and the light turned midway. Has anyone experience a similar situation? Also, are they still offering a deal before the trial in SF?
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:26 pm
hi Aren,
I saw a flash while crossing the intersection and I think I got caught by the camera, how long does it take for me to receive the ticket? how much is the fine now?
February 3rd, 2010 at 6:25 pm
@MIKE94118 — I can’t say for sure they still offer the deal; haven’t had anyone confirm it lately. Chances are they still do, though. If trial starts and they didn’t offer it, you can ask the judge for it as soon as your trial starts and hope they honor your request.
@Hal — The camera thinks you went into the intersection .4 seconds after the light turned red. Tough to fight that one.
@Alvin913 — The fine is around $480 I think. The ticket has to arrive within 15 days.
February 4th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
i recently rolled through a stop light making a right turn and they caught me on camera.
my ticket is about $446 and i was wondering the best way to try and get the fine reduced. should i just plead guilty? or try and fight it ?
February 4th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
I was at Doyle drive this morning right where it turns into Lombard and I thought I saw the light turn green and went ahead. Then I saw the camera lights flashing and realized that the green light I saw was for the intersection in front of me not mine which was still Red. The distance between the intersections is so short that it is easy to be mistaken.
I went to work and the first 2 people I spoke to said they’ve both gotten tickets at the same spot for the same reason. I wasn’t in a rush at all this morning and thought I was obeying the law. It just doesn’t feel fair. Do I have any recourse?
February 7th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
hi aren,
thanks for the info, so if the ticekt does not arrive after 15 days, is it safe to say i did not get a ticket? i’ve asked some people and they said they had camera flashes too by geary and 12th avenue/presidio, and they never received a ticket in the mail. so it’s possible that they don’t issue these tickets to everyone depending on what the camera sees?
February 9th, 2010 at 9:42 am
@Kathleen — the best way to get the fine reduced the most is to follow my trial + traffic school suggestiom.
@Lenny — I’d recommend trial + traffic school. Arguing to the judge that the intersection is confusing (while true, from your description) will unlikely cause the dismissal of the ticket. I would suggest you follow up with the city on the safety of that intersection, though — sounds like a death waiting to happen.
@Mike — legally the city has 15 days to deliver the ticket via mail. If you don’t have one after 21 days, I think you’re off the hook. They definitely do not issue all violations — an officer reviews them and if they can’t see the driver well (or other circumstances) they won’t issue the ticket.
February 11th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
My husband just got notification for turning right after the light has turned red in SF. It was a legal right turn, but may have been a “rolling stop”. With pictures it is hard to tell. There are a couple things that I noticed about the citation. Should we fight it (Note- He received a true running red light ticket a few months ago in San Mateo and we already did traffic school for that). The ticket is $446.
1) The picture is fuzzy. I can tell it is him because I know how he sits in the truck.
2) There is no date on the Must respond to the court on or before date.
3) I can not find the intersection of NB Park presidio Blvd (Rt 1) @ Lake St on google maps. I am not sure how to get back there to take a look at the intersection to make sure it did not have a no turn on red sign- Would it say that on the citation?
February 15th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
@Nicole: The intersection is Park Presidio Blvd @ Lake Street. (NB) means he was travelling northbound on Park Presidio. Look at the 2nd image in the picture. It will say V=(some number). What does it say? That’s the speed he was going when the light was red; the city will use that as evidence to argue that he didn’t stop before making a right-hand turn on red. The no “respond to court” date is interesting… look at CVC 40518, it requires that the “time and place when, and where, the person may appear in court” be included on the letter you were sent. If it’s not there, you have reason to ask for dismissal (not that you’ll be granted it, but it’s an interesting strategy).
February 16th, 2010 at 1:45 pm
Aren,
it’s me again. I finally got the red light ticket today. the picture is very fuzzy blurry. (do u the want the code to review the picture online?) I asked around and got different opinions. some told me that i can tell the judge that i wasn’t the driver but since I am the car owner, I still have to pay for the ticket. (if i say i wasn’t the driver, would the judge ask me who was it?) some just told me that I should just go to the traffic school to avoid all the trouble. What should I do man? and my ticket doesn’t have the date for the “respond to court”, what does that mean?
February 18th, 2010 at 12:21 am
@Alvin — first, I don’t recommend lying under oath. You don’t have to testify… if the judge asks you if it was you, who it was, etc., you can maintain your right to not testify. Or you can say you’re not sure that it’s you, if that’s the case. These are moving violations. Only the driver would be responsible for paying. The car owner is not.
I can’t tell you what to do. This blog outlines a lot of your options. If it were me, though, and there really was no ‘respond to court’ date filled out on the form (and they didn’t mention a date elsewhere), I’d just ignore the whole thing (save the ticket, though, you’ll probably need it later). It’s a big gamble though.
February 25th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
Aren:
Infomative site. Thanks. I wonder if your car has no front license plate, does the camera photograph the rear of the car or just front grill and driver?
February 25th, 2010 at 11:40 pm
As far as I know, the cameras in San Francisco only take photos from the front. So without a front plate, you’re not going to get a red light camera ticket. (Though you might get a “parking” ticket for not having one.)
Cameras in other cities nearby take photos and video from both the front and rear.
February 27th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
Hi, Feb 27 Sat around 2 am going home on Van ness and Bush. I completely stop at the red light, but i was looking down at my car’s dashboard green clock and thought the light turn green and hit the gas pedal. I back tracked and realize my mistake and stop in the middle section of van ness/bush for about 10 seconds, realizing what i did wrong. I think i didn’t see any flashes.How long you have to be sweat it out until i might get a ticket? how many days or week?
February 27th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
@hippo: If you don’t get a ticket in the mail after 3 weeks, you’re probably not going to get one.
March 4th, 2010 at 5:44 am
Hi, I was recently in SF and while driving southbound on Van Ness I saw a flash. It was mounted on a pole somewhere between Turk and Hayes. Are they new photo radars or was it something else?
March 4th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
@Bruno — as far as I know, there are no cameras on that stretch. The buses’ connections to the overhead wires sometimes cause sparks which flash brightly, which might explain it unless there’s a new camera installation.
March 10th, 2010 at 10:32 am
Great service you are providing! Lots of info on the Red Light Photo issue info, I hope I don’t have one of those coming. I did receive a “parking violation” for violation VC 22526 A (listed as blocking an intersection) described as refusing to turn. I was in SF 2 weeks ago and a guy in a blue shirt with a sheriff’s star (the kind my children got at county fairs) pointed me to turn right on 6th from Market and my destination required a right turn on 4th, a one way to the right. I was not in a Right Turn Only Lane. I have learned there is a new “Market Street Pilot” making vehicles turn at various places. Any suggestions on this one? Thanks.
March 11th, 2010 at 7:57 am
I got a ticket for a rolling stop while turning right in SSF – Westborough and El Camino. The city has already issued refunds to 7,000 because the city council did not ratify the contract with the camera co. I did not fall in that time frame. There is another argument that the city has to give warnings for 30 days and that would be me. Do you think that is a valid case? Thanks for your input.
March 12th, 2010 at 10:54 am
hi, i have a ticket in january, how many times i have to pay it please, thanks
March 12th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
@Fran — no experience with that one. Is it a parking citation or moving violation?
@Cindy — Yes, it’s a very valid case if the city in fact did not issue warning citations for 30 days.
@Brice — Where was the ticket, and what was it for?
March 12th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
it was a red light ticket in SF, thanks
March 14th, 2010 at 3:59 am
Hi aren,
I was making a left on the chestnut intersection in south city. I stopped behind the line because it was red, but when it turned green, I started going but the cameras flashed. Will I get a ticket ?
March 16th, 2010 at 12:23 am
Brice — the notice they sent you in the mail will have the “must respond by” date on it. Be sure to appear on or before that date.
Kyle — hard to say. Wait 20 days, and see if you have a ticket in the mail. If so, check back here and let’s see what their evidence claims.
March 16th, 2010 at 9:07 am
Hi Aren,
I just got a redlight photo taken on Bush and Van Ness in SF, but I have a nose bra on my car and therefore no visible front plate. Do you know if that camera takes rear plate photos? Do you think I’ll be receiving a ticket in the mail for this?
thanks,
Sandra
March 16th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
@Sandra — I don’t think any cameras in SF take photos of the rear license plate, so you probably won’t get a ticket.
April 16th, 2010 at 6:36 am
Hi Aren,
I was on the Lake and Park presidio intersection going east. I stopped and was waiting for a light to turn green. When the light turned green, i drove into the intersection so that i could make a left turn onto northbound park presidio. I was almost complete with my turn when I saw flashes from behind me. Does this mean i will be getting a ticket?
Nicole
April 18th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
@Nicole — From your description, I don’t believe so. You’ll know for sure in a few weeks!
April 22nd, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Just an update on my Feb 4th post – I never got a ticket in the mail – Proof that God exists.
April 28th, 2010 at 9:07 am
Knowledge is power. I appreciate this information and feel better about the $450+ ticket that will inevitably be in my mailbox in a couple weeks. I was heading west bound on Harrison @ 8th (nasty little intersection) and saw a *flash* while I was blatantly in the intersection after the light turned red. I plan on using the trial + traffic school option. I hope that option is still viable and that it plays out in the way described above. Has anyone has a recent experience? Was the fine really lowered to $50 + $30? Also, what does “posting bail” mean? Do I pay the original fee and then get it lowered later?
April 30th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
“Posting bail” means exactly what you said: you pay your fine in full, then get money back later. I haven’t heard an update from anyone in a while, but I have no reason to think the trial + traffic school deal has changed significantly. Please let me know your experience.
May 3rd, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Hmmm, read somewhere “posting bail” is 10% of the amount due. Is that not the case here? Thanks!
May 4th, 2010 at 1:25 pm
hi. i was driving my employers car. it was around noon and i was northbound on franklin about to cross geary and thought i could clear the yellow but got nailed with two flashes while driving through the middle of the intersection. if a ticket is processed it will go to my boss. what are his options? can he say it wasn’t him driving (which will be obvious from the picture) and get it dismissed? will they require him to reveal who it was in for dismissal? any advice would be great. thanks.
May 5th, 2010 at 5:09 am
@fela: It is legal to enter the intersection on yellow if there’s room for you on the other side. If you did enter on yellow, the flashes were probably for someone behind you.
If not, (i.e. the camera thought you entered on red) then your employer will get the ticket. Though they will try to make it seem otherwise, he does not have to tell them who was driving. It might involve him making a trip to the police station or even going to court, though. It likely won’t get dismissed by mail.
May 5th, 2010 at 5:10 am
@Rincon Hill’er: Posting bail for infractions is the full amount of the ticket.
May 9th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
I know for a fact I got photographed at the Harrison and First intersection. I plan to attend traffic school for the fee reduction. Could you possibly explain how that exactly works when I do receive my ticket in the mail?
May 13th, 2010 at 11:19 am
I got a red light ticket while driving a car registered in my husbands name (so the ticket is actually to him at the moment – we’ll see if he rats me out). The offense took place March 3rd and we just got the ticket the day before mothers day. I drive through this intersection daily. I don’t make a habit of going through red lights and this one came as a total shock. Is there a way to know if there are any other such tickets we haven’t gotten in the mail yet?
May 13th, 2010 at 11:29 am
@Argh — if he goes to court instead of ratting you out, it will be dismissed. Also, depending on the reason why it was delayed getting to you, it might no longer be valid. Keep the envelope with the postmark. And no, there’s no way to know of red light tickets that you haven’t received yet. By law they have to be delivered to you within 15 days.
May 17th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
Hi,
I got red light violation with camera in Union City on April 27, 2010. I just received the pictures 1 week after that..the face was not clear and only half( covered by the visor). The first picture said that Red 0.11 and elapsed time : 00( zero)xz
Picture 2: Red 0.98, elapsed time 0.87. It is a 40 mile/hr street and I was driving 35 miles( per the picture).
Do you mind to explain what are those numbers from the picture?
I am trying to go to court because the fine is $446. Let me know..Thank you
May 18th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
@Jenny — The numbers are saying that you (allegedly) crossed the ’stop’ line after the light was red for .11 seconds already. The second picture was taken .87 seconds later, when the light had been red for .98 seconds.
If the picture is not clear, I recommend going to court. They will most likely offer you a reduced fine.
May 23rd, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Hi Im from Canada and do not have a front plate on my car. I was in SF and burned a red light and saw the flash. The car is not under my name. What should I expect: will the owner get the ticket, if he does and says its not him thats it? is there a chance i might get nothing since i dont have a ffront plate? thank you in advance for your time
May 24th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
@notagain –
Without a front plate, chances are the owner won’t be mailed a ticket. If he does, assuming the photo doesn’t look like him, he can go to court and get it dismissed.
May 24th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
I ran a red light on May 9, 2010 and I saw the camera flashes go off. It’s now May 25, 2010 and still no ticket and 15 calendar days have passed. Isn’t there some sort of law that states that tickets must be issued within 15 days?
May 24th, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Thank you Aren..
don’t you think 0.11 seconds is really short( below 0.4 seconds)? can I argue that it will be too dangerous to stop ?
the picture of the face has half covered by the visor…
June 3rd, 2010 at 10:14 am
Aren,
I recently got a right on red ticket. But I was only going 10 mph, the video shows no cars in oncoming traffic before nor after my turn, and I am a student…this 436$ ticket is an extreme financial hardship for me…do you think there is any point in fighting the ticket?
June 3rd, 2010 at 10:48 am
ty Aren for your time; since I was pictured and the owner is actually a woman and i live in montreal and the ticket was in san fransisco chances are it wont even get mailed right?
June 3rd, 2010 at 10:56 am
@alana — by your admission you are guilty of not stopping; however that doesn’t mean you have to pay full price. Plead not-guilty with the clerk (which means paying the $436), go to trial, and they will offer you a significant discount if you accept traffic school (assuming your are eligible) and refund the difference.
June 3rd, 2010 at 7:20 pm
I’ve been quite paranoid about traffic violations since getting a speeding ticket more than two years ago. So maybe someone could offer me some thoughts.
Recently, I came to a rolling stop inside the crosswalk going westbound on Howard, at 4th, on a red. I did not pass the crosswalk into the intersection, and I don’t recall the red light camera flashing. (But it was sunny out and I was looking towards my left, and the camera would have been on the right, so I might have missed the flash.) With all the roadwork going on at that intersection, I was concerned about road hazards and missed the stop line on this wide crosswalk.
I suppose I’ll find out whether I got a ticket in a week or two, but any thoughts on whether one will come in the meantime?
June 4th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
Is the city still offering Trial + Traffic School discount for Red Light Camera tickets? Anyone knows?
June 8th, 2010 at 11:03 pm
Haven’t heard for sure lately, but chances are good it’s still around.
June 17th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
My dad received a SF red light camera ticket in the mail. I was driving my dad’s car, and the picture clearly shows that the driver was not him.
I understand that my dad can say that it was not him and does not have to disclose the identity of the actual driver.
What we are unclear on is the process by which we should do so. My ticket says that “if you were not the driver,” my dad must fill out the affadavit of non-liability on the ticket, in the beginning of which my dad must check either “New Owner (vehicle was sold prior to violation date)” or “Identified Driver (driver other than registered owner).” For the latter case, he is asked for the actual driver’s name, driver’s license no., etc.
Can he simply write under actual driver’s name “I have no statement regarding the actual driver”?
The instruction sheet says that if the information on the identified driver is “accurate and complete”, the citation will be dismissed, but if it is not “accurate” (note: they don’t say not complete), the citation will remain in his name until the Court receives the correct information.
Advice?
June 18th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
I had the picture but the face is covered half by the visor? ..and the red light was on for 0.11 second..can I argue that is too fast and dangerous to stop?
June 19th, 2010 at 8:45 am
@Moses:
The city will not make that path easy for you, though it is your/his right. He can certainly try to write “no statement” but they will probably ignore it and continue to prosecute. I say it’s worth a shot, though. Let me know if you try it.
Other options:
1) schedule a time with the police department to see the high-resolution photos they have. When it’s clear to the officer that they have the wrong person, they will badger him to reveal who it is. When he refuses to say and threatens to go to court they will often dismiss the charges.
2) go to the courthouse clerk, plead not-guilty (you’ll pay the ticket amount) and then schedule a trial. Assuming it looks nothing like him, it’ll be dismissed (after a substantial waste of time).
3) (least favorite) let him reveal it’s you. when you go to trial, move for dismissal because the evidence at that point is hearsay — your dad won’t be subpoenaed and his statement could be considered hearsay.
Aren
June 19th, 2010 at 8:47 am
@Jenny: While .11 seconds is tough to measure (and, in fact, gives you lots of defenses [ see highwayrobbery.net ]) I really doubt it will work as an argument since you had a whole yellow light to come to a stop.
If there could be any doubt that it’s you on the other side of the visor, then plead not-guilty and go to court. Don’t lie that it’s you, but don’t admit it either — the evidence has to stand on its own.
June 20th, 2010 at 12:51 pm
Just wondering if anyone without a front plate has experience with accidentally running any of the red lights on 19th ave and also park presidio? did you get a ticket? I have no front plate, and was stuck in heavy traffic and I think I got the flash turning right on red from sloat onto 19th, and the flash again on park presidio…. Just wondering if I should be expecting a ticket or if having no front plate saved me… Thank You in advance..
June 20th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
@Nate — I doubt you’ll get a ticket. No cameras in SF (that I know of) take any photos or video from the rear.
June 28th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Got a red light violation at Park Presidio and Lake. Ouch, $446 plus a point on my driving record (what’s that going to cost?) I would like to use the trial + traffic school option if possible. I’m a firefighter with a class B commercial license, will this preclude me from traffic school or this option. I hope this option is still viable and that it plays out in the way described above. Have not seen any follow up posting, so I’m wondering if this option has been working as stated. Any feedback and recommendations would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
June 29th, 2010 at 9:32 am
I recently got an automated red light citation on the intersection of Oak and Octavia in San Francisco. When I entered the intersection the light was green and then turned yellow but went immediately to red. I was amazed at how quickly the yellow light changed, it seemed like maybe one second. Is there any info or history of shortened yellows in S.F. or what can be done about it?
July 1st, 2010 at 9:56 am
I know this has been asked a couple of times throughout this thread without response but has anyone done the trial + traffic method lately? If so, is it still an option to have your ticket reduced before the actual trial and if so what was the ticket price?
July 6th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
As of last week, trial+traffic no longer works. No offer is made by the clerk.
You may get the admin fee ($52) for traffic school waived, but you still pay $446 plus whatever traffic school charges.
In fact, if you are able to get the fine reduced at all, take it.
Some moron who had his fine reduced to $140 appealed and tried to get it dismissed. The judge said no dice and told him he had to pay the full $446.
Interesting, the only people who were all convicted were the red light camera folks. That was 4 out of 28 people the day I went. Of the remaining 26, who were there for other violations, 18 were dismissed because the officer did not show, and 6 were convicted as the officer was present.
So bottom line – you get a red light ticket, you are screwed. Have $500 handy, because you will need it.
Imterestingly, if you get a regular ticket, you should go for trial, as there is 66% chance the cop will not show!
Thanks for this site, but the deal is dead now.
The best advice is to remove your front plate, that way they cannot send a ticket. If you get stopped, tell cop it was damaged and get a fix-it ticket.
Good luck…hope you can learn from my mistake of 0.4 seconds.
July 13th, 2010 at 10:09 am
@rick — if you choose to fight the ticket, as part of the trial process you can ask the city for the timing information of the yellow light. if it’s too short (there’s a chart that mandates the minimum yellow light time given the road’s speed limit), the ticket will be dismissed.
July 16th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Aren,
You provide an excellent site. My red light violation was June 19th. My “Courtesy Warning Notice” was not even postmarked until July 8th (19 days later). Before i saw your site, I called to ask for photos. I was told “they could not access them.” On July 14th they finally mailed some – 25 days after the violation. Am I off the hook because I did not receive the notice within 15 days?
Thanks,
Jim
Jim
July 16th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
@Jim — The notice isn’t valid. Unfortunately you are not off the hook as the city won’t hold the city responsible for the incorrect service. Visit highwayrobbery.net, he’s got good info on the issue. If you fight it, you’ll file a demurrer, claiming the notice wasn’t proper and hence the ticket is invalid. If you want to go that route (it’s far from a sure thing) let me know and I’ll help you through it (my email address is on the bottom of the blog entry). Do you still have the envelope with the postmark?
July 17th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
Hi Aren,
Thanks for maintaining this excellent site and info.
I have got a red light ticket in Fremont, and I went for arraignment and pleaded not guilty and obtained trial date. At the time of incident, I had sever nausea cz of my pregnancy. crossed the stop line 0.5s after the light turned red. I could not estimate the yellow light time duration and had to cross the red light cz of my situation. I have a letter from my doctor stating my condition during the first trimister. I have no idea whether the judge will consider my situation and lower the fine ? Does the judge charge extra fine if he does not consider my reason as the valid one and finds me guilty? Do I have the option of traffic school in the trial?
First of all, Did I take a good decision of going for trial?
Thanks.
July 18th, 2010 at 10:43 am
Hi Aren and others,
I just came back to Germany (I’m German) from San Francisco. Unfortunately I run a redlight somewhere in the Financial district on my way to the Bay Bridge with a rental car.
The camera took two shots. That’S for sure.
Could you please tell me, what I have to expect? Has a foreigner pay the fine? How will that work? I can’t go this Traffic-school solution, because the flight will be to expensive
.
I can not understand, why there is a chance to pay only $ 80 while the fine is over $ 300. Do I have the chance to lower the fine? If yes, could anybody give me an idea how?
Thanks
Ulrich
July 21st, 2010 at 3:29 pm
Hi, I just received a citation under VC21453A in the (bail) amount of $466. In the pictures, the Red Time is shown as 00 (with the smaller digit after that being very blurry, even online.) The citation alleges that this smaller digit is “8″(0.8 sec reaction time) – (they are likely basing that on the second pic being taken at 2.0 seconds and the “time between pics” being recorded as 1.22 seconds.)
Even assuming one agrees that the smaller digit is 0.8, the human reaction time (time to start applying brakes) is an avg of 0.75 per DMV itself (http://www.skytran.net/09Safety/03sfty.htm).
Note that the code language is “A driver facing a steady circular red signal alone…”. A fraction of a second is not a “steady” red signal. Therefore, in light of the DMV reaction time of 0.75 seconds, a 0.8 second Red Time cannot be considered a “steady” red signal.
Do you think this may work? To advance such an argument, what do I need to do?
Second question: in the second pic, my speed is recorded at 31 in a 25 mph zone. Would this potentially increase my fine if I pleaded not quilty OR have they lost the opportunity to charge me with speeding?
Thanks much.
Ed
July 21st, 2010 at 3:31 pm
NOTE: in the previous post, 0.8 seconds is the Red Time and 0.75 secs is the avg reaction time. I mistakenly typed 0.8 sec “reaction time” in one place.
July 22nd, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Hi Aren,
I was driving in Ca and coming to a red light. I hit the break and made a complete stop but the red light camera went of and flashed once. I believe my front tire passed the crosswalk line about one foot. I am so scared that they will send me a ticket. This is my first one ever. Also, I was driving a relative’s car who is going to be out of state for several months. Do you think they will send me a ticket?
July 24th, 2010 at 8:51 am
Hey Aren great site.
I was driving on Franklin late one night and was timing all the lights so that I didn’t have to brake. I came up to Franklin and O’Farrell and as I was approaching the intersection the light was red, but I didn’t slow down knowing that it was going to turn green in just a moment. When the flash went off from the camera I am almost positive that the light had already turned green. Now I’m not even sure if I’ll receive a citation in the mail, but if I do I want to be prepared. I’ve read all the other comments and didn’t see any cases similiar to mine. Any thoughts on the best way to fight a ticket if it does arrive. It was also a very dark night and the flash didn’t seem sufficient enough to produce a quality picture. And I know that the intersection does not have the required warning signs posted, nor is there any warning signs posted going in or out of SF via the Golden Gate Bridge. As far as the other major entrances to the city I’m not sure, but I can’t remember ever seeing any warning signs anywhere in or around SF.
July 24th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Interesting website. I got stuck with a red light ticket. The ticket, though, is addressed to my maiden name. Any chance this can work in my favor?
July 25th, 2010 at 10:25 am
@Akshya — The judge will not charge you more than the original ticket. I do not think you have a good case and recommend you take whatever plea deal they offer that includes traffic school. Please do not drive if you are so nauseous.
@Ulrich — Don’t worry about it unless you get a letter from the court. I’d say there’s a good chance you won’t since you don’t live in the U.S.
@Ed –It’s a terrible case. You had at least 3 seconds of yellow to react to (unless you think the yellow light was too short), not just the .8 of red light time. No, they won’t add a speeding charge. If that’s your only argument, don’t waste your time with court (you will be found guilty) unless you’re hoping for a plea deal.
@Lid — No, I don’t think they’ll send you a ticket.
@Bryan — I’d expect a citation. The flash is sufficient. The city has tried to post signs at every highway exit; I don’t believe it’s sufficient but the court does. It’s a good argument at trial, but the judge will still find you guilty.
@Michie B — No, that argument won’t work. That’s the name your car is registered under… it’s still you.
July 26th, 2010 at 5:36 am
@Aren: I was driving in South SF, made a stop for a right turn, then rolled forward and stopped again because there were cars turning from the opposite side. I definitely stopped both times, but I can’t remember how long I stopped the first time or if I was completely behind the line, though I’m 99% sure I was and that I did stop. I made my right turn through the intersection. After my right turn, about 50 feet later I was out of the intersection and I was flashed twice by the camera on the cross street which I had turned onto. Would the camera to get me have to be across the intersection from where I entered? I didn’t see it flash, but the one after the right turn did. There was a sign before the intersection that said “Right on red okay after complete stop.” What do you think? Was it even for me, did I confuse the system, or am I going to get a ticket?
July 28th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
I was in S San Francisco this weekend. I made a left turn at westborough going to El Camino. The light flashed but from what I could recall, I didnt see any red light, it was green.
July 29th, 2010 at 10:13 am
I have an odd case. There was construction (19th Ave) and they had blocked both the right and left lanes, so people were merging in from both sides. I was in the middle lane (the only free one). As I approached the light, I made the usual mental calculation regarding how far away I am and if I can make (it was still green). But then a car from the right lane cut into my lane, and I had to touch the brakes to prevent hitting him. In that split second I had slowed down enough so that by the time I entered the crossing (behind the car who cut me off and made it in) the light was red.
Obviously I had the right of way in my own lane… so I had not accounted for the possibility of people cutting in.
First I get cut-off, and the guy who did that goes through but I get a ticket. I know this is probably too complex to win at a trial, but I do feel very bad that in spite of being a pretty good law abiding citizen, I have to now pay and waste time!
Any suggestions will be welcome.
August 1st, 2010 at 9:15 am
@ Aren: Thank you very much. So I need to wait
August 2nd, 2010 at 5:20 pm
Aren,
I slammed on the brakes this morning on 19th and Sloat. I could have stopped before the crosswalk, but the car behind me slammed her brakes and it didn’t look like she could avoid me. I decided to stop on the crosswalk to avoid getting my rear totaled, and I hesitantly looked at the camera across the street. I did not notice a flash go off at all.
My question is, does the flash have to go off for these cameras, or should I be expecting a nice fine in the mailbox?
Thank you
August 3rd, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Thank you Aren, Looks like the red light camera that I was caught does not have the ‘photo enforced’ or any kind of notice in the direction of my travel. Is this going to be a valid point to argue? Is Plea deal still offered?
August 4th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
Hi Aren, I remember my day quite clearly, I was on the way to the SF Acadamey of Sciences 2 weeks ago on July 21st when I noticed a series of flashes on 19th & Sloat @ approximately 8:20 AM while driving in the far right lane. I have had a previous encounter with a red light camera in Newark in which I decided to just pay for, so when I had seen the flash I was worried for the fear of losing more money since I’m a college student money doesn’t really come easy. When I crossed the first limit line the light was still yellow, and as I was in the middle it was still yellow. However, as I was directly below the stoplight/ on top of the 2nd limit the first flash came. I had also noticed right after the 1st flash that there was a Mercedes in the far left lane that had passed the 2nd limit line about 1.5 seconds after I did and thats when the flash from behind came. Correct me if I’m wrong but I also looked up the entire 19th street on google maps in search of “Photo Enforced” signs and none were posted. So, its been 2 weeks as of Wednesday. August 4th what do you think my chances of the ticket being for me is. The thing that makes me think the ticket is for me and not the Mercedes is because the camera looks like it is in a position that only takes photos of the right lane, so I was wondering if that is true or not? And what are the chances that the flashes were for me? By the way thank you so much for keeping up with the website man major props.
-Alex
August 5th, 2010 at 7:23 am
@Graham — those flashes weren’t for you.
@Joe — wait 3 weeks. If still no ticket in the mail, you’ll know for sure.
@Raihan — yes, that is a bad situation. If you get a ticket let us know — the road construction can perhaps be used to your advantage.
@Matt — If you don’t go through the intersection, they usually won’t send you a ticket.
@Akshya — realize that the city does not have to post those signs at every intersection. They can post them at all city entrances instead. You will lose at trial with that argument though, so be prepared to appeal. A commenter above reported the plea deal is no more.
@Alex — those flashes don’t sound like they were for you.
August 5th, 2010 at 10:49 am
Thanks Aren, would you happen to know when the latest a ticket can come in? It’s been two weeks and it’d be nice to know when I can rest at ease.
-Alex
August 5th, 2010 at 10:50 am
Alex — the law says 15 days. But sometimes they come up to 30 days later, and the judges won’t dismiss them for lateness.
August 5th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Thank you very much.
August 8th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
Hi- So the otherday I was on my motorcycle and the light was green when a large truck pulled in front of me obstructing the light. I slowed a bit and merged over and by the time u could see the signal it was yellow. Since the ground was wet I decided to excelerate instead of braking hard and possibly wiping out on the painted surfaces and the light changed as i hit the intersection and I saw the light flash. If I get this ticket what’s my best bet? I was thinking plead guilty but tell my circumstances in hopes of a lowered fine.
Oh by the way, I read sf city uses only front facing ACS cameras that only take front pics and bikes are safe because of no front plates?!?
Any advice p
August 8th, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Yes, you’re safe — no front plate = no ticket.
August 9th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
hey aren, the other day i ran a yellow light and it turn red and i think i saw the flash. the car is not under my name and i have no insurance. what should i expect? the owner of the car is my friend and i don’t know what to expect. what should i do?
August 12th, 2010 at 4:51 am
forgot to mention it was in Sacramento on florin road but forgot the cross street.
August 12th, 2010 at 5:11 am
Around 11pm yesterday I was coming home from my sisters house and I am always careful of my speed and stopping in time of the light and so on my way to drop my brother in law and his son home and as I believe I was around 200 feet away from the light it was still green and as I looked down a few seconds to make sure I didn’t go over speed limit and as soon as I looked up I don’t know how long the light have turned yellow so I had to quickly brake and as soon as I stopped on time while the light have turn red for couple seconds the camera took my picture (with my brother in law and his son in the car). It was a hard brake and I did not make it to the intersection nor was there any crosswalk line. So I’m wondering if I’m going to get a ticket for it? After reading some of the people’s comment I’m afraid they might think I ran the light because of my last minute brake. Also the car is under my sisters name and my mom and the address is under my sisters’ name. If they was to received the mail, what is the best way to handle this, even if it was a blurry or clear picture?
August 12th, 2010 at 11:49 am
On May 25, 2010 the Superior Court of California , County of Orange Appellate Division published the results of case 30-2009-00304893 trial count case number: SA12876PE
Basically the appeals court through out a lower courts conviction based on the fact that “the photographs contain hearsay evidence concerning the matters depicted in the photograph including the date, time and other information.” It went on to explain that there were no witnesses to testify about any of the technology, records, etc. and that the only person testifying (local police officer) was lacking specific knowledge regarding the technology. The appeals court also address exceptons to hearsay and official records.
I’m not a lawyer, but my question is – Given this rulling by an appeals court of california I would think that this case is ground for supporting a dismissal argument of a red light infraction.
What are your thoughts
August 12th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Hi Aren,
Thanks for the Reply. I have obtained the trial date which is in May’11. If there is a fair chance of Judge finding me guilty, there is no point in going to trial. Kind of newbee Question, Can I go to the court before the trial date and withdraw the trial, and pay the fine with traffic school option? Or should I have to wait till the trial day? I am not sure whether the Judge allows me to take up the Traffic school at the trial. Unable to decide anything! – Thanks
August 18th, 2010 at 10:38 am
i drove my brothers car to sf and i ran a light not on purpose. they sent him a letter to apper in a month. the letter had pix of me and not him. will he get a ticket and will they look for the driver?
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:03 pm
Aren,
Great blog. Anyone that has gotten one of these instantly feels like they’re being stabbed in the heart by the gov’t. I received a “courtesy warning” notice” and it says I owe the $466. I checked online and it comes up. My citation date was 7/21 and my due date is 8/25. I was reading the rules on:
http://www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/index.aspx?page=186
and it says “The citation will state when and where the violation occurred. It will include a photo of the vehicle in the intersection, a close-up of the driver and the vehicle’s license plate.”
My citation does not say where it happened or have any pictures. I would think this is a huge point of contention, or is there another citation sent out that usually includes photos and the specifics?
Thanks.
August 24th, 2010 at 8:50 am
@sam: if your friend gets the ticket, he/she can go to court and say it’s not him/her. They do not have to tell the court who is in the photo. Note that when you are borrowing a friend’s car, oftentimes you are covered under their insurance.
@MSX: I don’t think you’ll be getting a ticket. They rarely issue tickets when you didn’t go through the intersection.
@Dave: I’m aware of that appeal and I think it’s long overdue. However, depending on where you live, that case does not set a precedent since it was in Superior Court. Definitely try the same argument in your town, though, and it doesn’t hurt to bring up that judge’s ruling even though it is not binding.
@Akshya: you should be able to go to the clerk at any time to change your plea.
@John: Does the picture look like him? If not, your brother should go to court and testify that he was not driving. He does not have to give up who was driving, despite what the police will say.
@Aric: Something is missing. They have to send you photos of the infraction. It might have just been lost in the mail — call the issuing police department and ask to come in to see the evidence since you never got it in the mail.
August 24th, 2010 at 10:09 am
Has anyone on this website or anyone else you know received a ticket in the mail from the REAR license plate only..meaning I did not have a front plate but did see 2 flashes but I was only making aleft onto chestnut from el camino real on the green arrow but the flashes still went off…when I reached the intersection…Just curious. Thanks
Mike
August 24th, 2010 at 12:13 pm
Thank you very much Aren for all the advice and clarifications.
August 27th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
Oh Gosh. Feelin pretty stressed here. I went through the intersection at Geary and Franklin this morning and saw the flashes and I was the only one crossing. The light turned yellow, but I could swear that my front end had crossed the first line while it was still yellow. Who know…I guess I will find out soon. If my front bumper did in fact make it past the first line, will I still get a ticket? Do they just shoot tickets all day, and then go back and review them all and pick and choose who ever they think that they can prove ran the red beyond a reasonable doubt? Thanks in advance.
Rob
August 30th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
Wow, this is a great resource!
A couple of days ago, while driving my mom’s car, I think i ran a red light at park presidio and fulton. The light was yellow, and i was only going about 20-30mph towards golden gate park. The light changed to red just as i crossed the first crosswalk, so i didnt have anytime to stop. I didn’t see any flashes in front of me, but im not sure about behind me. Do you think i will get a ticket? And what is the best way to handle this situation? Thanks!
September 1st, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Seems I’m not the only one who was caught at Park Presidio and Lake. I was turning right and caught on camera. Does the .9 mean the light was red for that long when I passed the white line? How do they prove I didn’t stop before I went ahead and turned right?
I know in the court system in San mateo one can appear on or before their due date and go before the judge, not a trial, and probably get a reduced fine even pleading guilty. When I called SF court the person said there isn’t the same method in SF. Is that true or can I go to the court and expect a similar thing? Is the only way to even hope to get a lower fine and/or dismissed to request and appear in trial? I think I stopped before turning but not sure…should I plead not guilty? Or…my court date is quite soon…Sept. 15.
Any specific information would be appreciated.
Thank you.
Donna