I had a little brush with the law over the weekend, what started as a simple RBT turned into a bit of debacle cos me helmet was deemed not to be legal because the compliance sticker was not on the outside. It had a sewn in one on the inside but that wasn't good enough according to Mr Plod........The helmet is legal in every other respect. I couldn't leave the area until I had a compliant lid. My missus had to drive 160k round trip to get me my Shoei.

That episode cost $100 and 3 demerits!!!!!!!!!

This is how it should be, my Shoei has it, I dont like using it during summer cos it's too hot........

This is the offending Helmet, comfy but not legal????? No sticker........

And this is the internal compliance, which the law doesn't give a fig about........

Soooo if your riding in WA make sure ya got a shinny sticker on ya lid or can be costly, partic if ya havn't got many demerit points left.......

Bt

ORDERED NEW HELMET TODAY WITH SHINNEY STICKER AS BACK UP KEEP IT IN THE SADDLE BAGS

WTF are the cop's on........

 

 

fuck me why don't they go and fuck with the real crim's

I had a mate recently buy a totally knackered helmet from a garage sale. When I asked what he wanted it for he said he just wanted the compliance stickers since his (on his good helmet) had fallen off.

And another link as at 20th September 2008

http://www.perthstreetbikes.com/forum/f68/helmet-standard-w-66142/

interesting link u raised mainey88

if u read it and it is correct, then bobtail should get off depending on one critical factor ......

what defines a sticker

if u could argue successfully that the cloth patch inside the helmet is classified as a sticker then you get off ..if not ..then must cough up

Interesting coments... the internal lable cannot be read on my RJ's because of wear and its only 12 months old.

 my guess on why just the internal lable is not sufficient is it is easy to change lining.

 

...... a point of interest, whilst at Bike Week one guy who was air brushing helmets was placing approval stickers on the air brushed helmets. what may me realise was that they had sequential numbers and so he showed me the box of stickers... mmmmm

Hi BT

Do not pay the fine yet, you've got 28 days to pay it anyway. Let me do some research and I will PM you with the findings.

I have a good mate who works for DPI in the traffic department and he is quite knowledgable in all matter of traffic and the Vehicle Standard Regulations - he was an inspector for number of years. I will call him and let you know asap.

Do not get rid of the "offending" helmet, in case you decide to go to Court it will be your evidence.

Tell em the sticker was on there and the copper pulled it off....

Excerpt from the Road Traffic Code 2000 -as at 20 September 2008
244. Drivers and pillion passengers upon motor cycles to wear protective helmets

(1) In this regulation—
protective helmet means a helmet that is, or is of a standard or type that is, approved by the Director General, for the purposes of this regulation, by notice in the Gazette.
(2) A person shall not drive a motor cycle unless —
(a) that person is wearing securely on his or her head a protective helmet; and
(b) where any other person is riding or being carried on the motor cycle, that other person is wearing a protective helmet securely on his or her head.
Points: 3 Modified penalty: 2 PU
(3) Where any other person is riding or being carried on the motor cycle, that other person shall wear a protective helmet securely on his or her head.
Modified penalty: 2 PU
(4) The provisions of subregulations (2) and (3) do not apply so as to require the wearing of a protective helmet by a person who has, for reasons relating to the person’s medical condition or for any other reason which the Director General considers sufficient, been exempted in writing by the Director General, on or before 30 November 2000, from that requirement.
(5) The Director General may at any time, by notice in writing to the person, amend or revoke an exemption given to a person under subregulation (4).
(6) An exemption given under this regulation —
(a) has effect from the time it is given until the expiry date ascribed to that exemption by the Director General and set out in the written exemption; and
(b) may be renewed for a specified period by the Director General.



Note section 244(1) where it say's approved by the Director General, for the purposes of this regulation, by notice in the Gazette.



So the Government Gazette states (in the large letters):


Published by:
Transport
GOVERNMENT GAZETTE Western Australia

No. 259. 14-Dec-2007
Page: 6249 Pdf - 547kb
TR301 Road Traffic Act 1974 Road Traffic Code (Protective Helmets) Notice 2007

Given by the Director General under the Road Traffic Code 2000 regulations 222(1) and 244(1).
1.Citation

This notice is the Road Traffic Code (Protective Helmets) Notice 2007.
2.Commencement

This notice comes into operation as follows:
(a) clauses 1 and 2 — on the day on which this notice is published in the Gazette;
(b) the rest of the clauses — on the day after that day.
3.Previous notice superseded

This notice supersedes the Road Traffic Code (Protective Helmets) Notice 2000.
4.Protective helmets (bicycles— regulation222)

A protective helmet that complies with one of the following standards —
(a) AS/NZS 2063:1996 (Standards Australia);
(b) Standard B-95 (the Snell Memorial Foundation);
(c) Standard B-95A (the Snell Memorial Foundation);
(d) Standard B-95C (the Snell Memorial Foundation),
and carries a sticker issued by Standards Australia, or the Snell Memorial Foundation (as the case may be), indicating that compliance, is approved by the Director General for the purposes of the Road Traffic Code2000 regulation 222.
5.Protective helmets (motorcycles— regulation244)

A protective helmet that —
(a) complies with —
(i) the type and standard specified in AS 1698:1988 (Standards Australia) and, where fitted with an eye shield, has an eye shield that complies with AS 1609:1981 (Standards Australia); or
(ii) the type and standard specified in AS/NZS 1698:2006 (Standards Australia);
and
(b) carries a sticker issued by Standards Australia indicating that compliance,
is approved by the Director General for the purposes of the Road Traffic Code 2000 regulation 244.
ERIC LUMSDEN, Director General.

———————————


Government of Western Australia
State Law Publisher. All contents Copyright (C) 2003.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer

(ii) the type and standard specified in AS/NZS 1698:2006 (Standards Australia);
and
(b) carries a sticker issued by Standards Australia indicating that compliance,
is approved by the Director General for the purposes of the Road Traffic Code 2000 regulation 244.

 

Of course they put that at the end.

 

but remember guys ..... is the cloth patch inside classed as an actual sticker?????

worth a try tho

dont think it matters where the helmet comes from .... they just have to meet australian standards

I am sorry but I dont think u will get anywhere with the seller or even the maker ... they will simply pass the buck .."when it was sold to u it had the sticker and met all rules"

the key as some people have pointed out is that the rules dont actually say where the sticker must be... so if the sticker on the outside is exactly the same as the cloth patch inside ... u would think it complies ...but we all know the law is an ass

Just thought I would add my 2 cents, I agree with Theseus.

I would go to court and represent myself, most importantly take the helmet in.

Also if you are found quilty the magistrate does not have to impose the demerit points.

 

 

Look a little closer at the first clause....


(1) In this regulation—
protective helmet means a helmet that is, or is of a standard or type that is, approved by the Director General, for the purposes of this regulation, by notice in the Gazette.
(2) A person shall not drive a motor cycle unless —

It states "is of a standard or type that is, approved by the director general"

If they have a Helmet here in WA that is approved and you buy the same helmet from overseas it is still covered because it has been approved by them.
A guy on the PSB site had this happen to him and he had his day in court and won on this same situation.
He was cited for having a non-conforming helmet and proved in court that the helmet was an "approved type"

Just a little added info for those that would have me ignor and wait for the 28 day infringement notice period to expire and let them come to me. The back of the notice states.

COURT HEARING: You should immediately and before the due date, in writting, advise the Infringement Management and Operations, State Traffic Coordination and Enforcement,WA Police - Address etc - for your election to have the matter heard by a court.

For a court hearing the following applies: The monetary penalty on this notice (Infringement notice) is that prescribed and fixed by the Road Traffic (infringement) Regulations. It should not be taken as any indication of a penalty that may be applied by a court under the normal provisions of the relevant statute.

NON-PAYMENT:  After 28 days from the date of Issue if you have not paid the the prescribed penalty, it is deemed that you have chosen not to be dealt with under the Infringement  provisions of theroad traffic act and the matter will automatically proceed to and be registered at the fine enforcement Registry. A drivers licence or vehicle licence suspension under the fines, Penalties and Enforcement act may be imposed etc......

The law moves in mysterious ways and I aint no lawyer, suffice to say the bastards have pretty well everything covered........

Bt

Hi BT

I called my mate but he is on holidays in NZ, he is returning to WA on Monday the 12th January and I am meeting him for a beer and rest assured we will discuss the matter.

Some points regarding the Traffic Infringement Notices:

1. You've got 28 days from the date of issue to pay the ticket. It's the law and you can pay on the last day without any repercussions.

2. If you do nothing (not pay and not elect to go to Court) the Infringement Management and Operations will send you "Final Notice", which is nothing more than a remainder to pay the ticket but it (the remainder) will be $10 dearer. You will get another 28 days to pay the remainder.

3. If you ignore the remainder and not pay, the matter will be registered with the Fines Enforcement Registrar who by law have to send you a letter informing you of the "Intention to suspend your Drivers Licence" and it will give you an opportunity to respond to this notice within 1 callendar month.

4. If you ignore the "Intention to Suspend" the matter is finaly registered with the Fines Enforcement Registrar and again they have to send you a letter informing you that your licence has been suspended. So you have approximately 4 to 5 moths before your licence is suspended.

5. Although the information on the ticket say that you only have 28 days from the date of issue of the original ticket to be able to elect to have this matter heard by the Court, practically you can elect to go to Court at any stage. It will cost you a little more (no more than $50) but only if YOU LOOSE THE CASE IN COURT.

6. If you elect to go to Court, the law works to your advantage, it is called "Onus of Proof" (sometimes it is called "Burden of Proof"). Prosecution (cops in this case) have to prove that your helmet is not road worthy "Beyond reasonable doubt"  but you - the defendant, don't have to prove anything. Onus on you is on the "Ballance of Probabilities" to shed doubt that what the prosecution are stating is not true - ie that it is probable that your helmet is road worthy.

7. In the unlikely scenario that you loose the matter, the Magistrate cannot give you more points that the original penalty. Monetary penalty for that offence is $100 and the Court costs (summons) is approximately another $100. So the most you loose is roughly $200.

Now you and only you can decide if you want to go to Court or not, but for the sake of $200 bucks i would have a crack.

If you elect to go to Court all you have to do is write a very short letter stating "I wish to have this matter heard by a court", attach the blue copy of the infringement and mail it to the address provided on the infringement.

Here's an update of the helmet sticker issue........

Because most places were shut for the Xmas/newyear hols I couldn't get too many answeres until last week and today. I took the offending helmet back to where I purchased it and gave the owner of the outlet an ear full. At first he denied that they would sell a helmet without the sticker, but when he actualy saw it he agreed that there could not have been a sticker on it as the void thing would show up. He agreed to get onto RJays and see what they make of it. Today I got a call from the shop stating that RJays are appologetic and that I am the second person in Australia they have had this problem with. RJays will send me a letter stating that fact and assist me to get my points back, they have also agreed to give me a new helmet.

With that info I went to the local cop shop and asked them what my course of action should be, I am to write a letter to the WA fines infringement dept. detailing what occured at the RBT and produce a copy of RJays letter etc.

So we will see what happens next, if the letter thing fails than I will more than likely take it to court.

Gotta thank Bano for researching and giving some good advice, thanks mate......

Bt

hey BT... there's a guy from PSB who took his case to court and won.... can get his contact details if you want.

Bob

Spoke to my mate from DPI and that's what he said:

1. Lack of the sticker does not render the helmet unroadworthy providing that there is a sewn in logo inside (must be legible)

2. Read the charge on the infringement. It says something to the effect of: "riding with unroadworthy helmet" or something along those lines. It doesn't say "having a helmet without a sticker" so if you decide to go to court all you have to do is cast a shadow of the doubt that your helmet could be roadworthy and you have won it mate !!!

Hope it helps