35% of red light-camera tickets go un...

35% of red light-camera tickets go unpaid

There are 77 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Mar 26, 2011, titled 35% of red light-camera tickets go unpaid. In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

If you're one of those Las Cruces motorists who has received a citation in the mail for an alleged violation caught on a traffic enforcement camera, you might want to check your mailbox again.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#62 Mar 28, 2011
Also forgive Zig Zag. He may be high.
RacerX

Albuquerque, NM

#63 Mar 28, 2011
Drop the crack pipe dude.
Zig_Zag wrote:
I am glad all you lousy drivers are getting tickets.
I am also glad your not paying them, there will be arrest warrants issued for each and every one of you lousy drivers.
I will be looking forward to the article about the police sweep rounding up record numbers of lousy drivers for contempt of court.

Since: Apr 09

Las Cruces, NM

#64 Mar 28, 2011
watchdog1 wrote:
<quoted text> You have got to be a "shill" for Redflex,no question about it.
Please explain. Is it because I don't speed or run red lights but think that anyone who does should be ticketed?

Listen, I don't care how people get a ticket. If it's a camera or a cop, people need to be held responsible for the actions.

You want to get rid of these cameras? Stop giving them a reason to be there.
Gail Freel

Las Cruces, NM

#65 Mar 28, 2011
Daughter got a ticket for turning left on a yellow! There were two signals there NOT SYNCHRONIZED! The camera video clearly showed the discrepancy. The one on the right hand side for turning right to the mall was RED, her light was YELLOW but she had to pay. The officer and the judge in the court apologized but said their hands were tied. It is a HUGE SCAM! They should be outlawed - if I did something like that I would be put in jail for fraud! So should they!

Since: Apr 09

Las Cruces, NM

#66 Mar 28, 2011
Gail Freel wrote:
Daughter got a ticket for turning left on a yellow! There were two signals there NOT SYNCHRONIZED! The camera video clearly showed the discrepancy. The one on the right hand side for turning right to the mall was RED, her light was YELLOW but she had to pay. The officer and the judge in the court apologized but said their hands were tied. It is a HUGE SCAM! They should be outlawed - if I did something like that I would be put in jail for fraud! So should they!
There's video of her NOT running a red light and you paid the ticket?

If I suggested getting a lawyer, people here would be all up in arms for suggesting that you waste our tax dollars in court, but it sounds as if getting an attorney might be a good idea.

If she ran the red light, she needs to pay. But if she didn't AND there's proof that she didn't, then you should be refunded all costs associated with that ticket.

“Irony, metaphor, film @ eleven”

Since: Feb 08

Old Mesilla/New Las Cruces

#67 Mar 28, 2011
Do you have unpaid red light camera tickets?

Well, now it's going to start hitting your personal credit record and I hope someone sues the living crap out of the City of Las Cruces on this one.

This is pure gold-plated extortion.

“Irony, metaphor, film @ eleven”

Since: Feb 08

Old Mesilla/New Las Cruces

#68 Mar 28, 2011
ColdFeet wrote:
<quoted text>
Please explain. Is it because I don't speed or run red lights but think that anyone who does should be ticketed?
Listen, I don't care how people get a ticket. If it's a camera or a cop, people need to be held responsible for the actions.
You want to get rid of these cameras? Stop giving them a reason to be there.
If the intersection has traffic lights that are not timed to
each other or even the correct speed limit, you are so screwed.
No judge will stand to be told their court is in the wrong.

It sets a bad example to the other bad courts.

There will be no mercy from the court.
This is how they get paid.(and they hate hearing THAT too!)

These red-light cameras are just lazy, undependable, unwanted.

Since: Jan 10

Las Cruces, NM

#69 Aug 25, 2011
Snap wrote:
I got sent to a credit agency for one of those tickets. I never saw the ticket because there is no agency that is accountable IN THIS CITY to show the accused their ticket. I had to deal with a credit agency back East and they promised to send me a receipt as soon as I paid. I am still waiting for my receipt and I paid back in November 2010.
By crossing state lines this is now a FEDERAL matter. Time to contact the Feds especially the Postmaster General
Watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#70 Aug 26, 2011
Pretty good chance that the City is tied up with an Airtight Contract that is gonna cost like blazes to get out of. BUT do the right thing and get out of it!
Then get the Cameras out of the City.
Then I would suggest that you resign from your positions. Since most of the information on how this would turn out was readily available before you got the City into this mess. You bought into a Scam and should have known better. Guess the thought of big dollars got in the way.
This is not good Stewardship of a City.

Since: Jan 10

Las Cruces, NM

#71 Aug 26, 2011
Watchdog1 wrote:
Pretty good chance that the City is tied up with an Airtight Contract that is gonna cost like blazes to get out of. BUT do the right thing and get out of it!
Then get the Cameras out of the City.
Then I would suggest that you resign from your positions. Since most of the information on how this would turn out was readily available before you got the City into this mess. You bought into a Scam and should have known better. Guess the thought of big dollars got in the way.
This is not good Stewardship of a City.
It is interesting to watch as Red Light cameras go down like 10 pins in a bowling alley. The companies are suing cites as the cameras come down (for example, Houston is being sued by ATS for $25 million) but given that in most civil suit trial you face a jury I wonder how well that is going to work out.

As for the idea of an Airtight Contract if the contract is found to violate a law then it would become an illegal contract and unenforceable.
Watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#72 Aug 26, 2011
BGrubb wrote:
<quoted text>
It is interesting to watch as Red Light cameras go down like 10 pins in a bowling alley. The companies are suing cites as the cameras come down (for example, Houston is being sued by ATS for $25 million) but given that in most civil suit trial you face a jury I wonder how well that is going to work out.
As for the idea of an Airtight Contract if the contract is found to violate a law then it would become an illegal contract and unenforceable.
I believe that a large amount of the "Start Up Costs" of the Camera Companies were spent on their Contracts with the Cities,in order to make sure if the Cities want back out of the Scam , they will be screwed finically. EG.Houston.
Best thing for everyone is to read contents in www.themewspaper.com
If you go back a few pages on their site, you will find Las Cruces listed too.
Watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#73 Aug 26, 2011
Sounds like it's time to start a "Petition" to get rid of RedFlex on the November ballot. No Camera Company has ever survived a petition yet.
And if it works then you will see how nasty these Companies can get,and find out how honest your City Council is.
Watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#74 Aug 26, 2011
Watchdog1 wrote:
Sounds like it's time to start a "Petition" to get rid of RedFlex on the November ballot. No Camera Company has ever survived a petition yet.
And if it works then you will see how nasty these Companies can get,and find out how honest your City Council is.
Here is a sit where a Petition Ban can be downloaded;
http://banthecams.org/Brochures/ban-red-light...
Watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#75 Aug 27, 2011
Correction on #72. That should have been: www.thenewspaper.com
watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#76 Aug 29, 2011
LHOOQ wrote:
You break the law, you get caught, there is proof, you pay the price. What's so hard to understand about it? That's the contract that goes with the PRIVILEGE of having a driver's license.
Another "SHILL" for the Red-Flex Company. You can find the exact wording on other "Topix" sites throughout the Nation.
Did you know that Red-Flex has a paid P.R. firm that routinely inserts these comments in various posts like "Topix" to make their Scam look legal and ethical? It's true,go check it out. A good place to start is www.thenewspaper.com
watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#77 Aug 29, 2011
LHOOQ wrote:
You break the law, you get caught, there is proof, you pay the price. What's so hard to understand about it? That's the contract that goes with the PRIVILEGE of having a driver's license.
In this RED-FLEX "SHILL" placed comment you will notice the word "Privilege" is capitalized to give it a more authoritized effect.
Since the roads are paid for by the Drivers,and are maintained by the Drivers money,and are built on Public lands,that belong to everyone, etc, who is giving the Privilege to us? Think about it.
wasitstatefarm

Huntsville, AL

#78 Jan 23, 2014
Our representatives accepted bribes as gifts? Somehow, not so surprised. Maybe now names will be shared and the guilty will step down.

Article Title
Watchdog: Red light bribe scandal could be widespread
Fired Redflex exec names 13 other states, says he's aiding federal inquiry
chicagotribune wrote:
<quoted text>Rosenberg said that during his tenure Redflex "bestowed gifts and bribes on company officials in dozens of municipalities within, but not limited to the following states: California, Washington, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Florida, New Jersey, Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/c...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Hatch Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News High school student charged with assaulting tea... (Oct '10) Sat joedoe911 120
Anyone Know "Doc" Daniel Brandt? Sat joedoe911 7
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) Jan 16 Phillip 7,117
News N.M. man charged with hitting child with fly sw... (Aug '10) Jan 11 FacePalmingINTENSELY 35
News Swat situation ends without injury in Dona Ana ... (Jan '11) Jan 11 Djordan 48
(.R ox y Bulk!!) ku*sh !! (Nov '15) Jan 7 Puffthemagicdragon 3
Ivan Jan 7 Puffthemagicdragon 8

Hatch Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hatch Mortgages