ESTATES SPEED TRAPPING

Q

Quid Pro Quo

New Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Despite the High Court judgement of 17 November which found that estates may not enforce traffic rules on the roads within the estates, my estate resumed speed trapping AND pulling residents off the road to check their driver's licences. I guess they missed this part of the judgement: "In my view, courts would be failing in their duties were they to overlook and/or condone flagrant and deliberate contraventions of statutory provisions. If in fact there are other associations and/or estates in the country who, like the first respondent herein, either through ignorance or plain arrogance on their part, have seen it fit not to comply with statutory provisions, it’s time that they did."
 
Just don't stop and don't pay the fines.

They can take you to court and you'll laugh at them!

I had the same issue with my body corporate enforcing illegal rules about animals (basically making my dogs illegal, which is illegal). I told them I won't comply, they threatened to kick me out and nothing happened since they actually have no right to kick my dogs or me nor to enforce an illegal provision.
 
Quid Pro Quo said:
Despite the High Court judgement of 17 November which found that estates may not enforce traffic rules on the roads within the estates, my estate resumed speed trapping AND pulling residents off the road to check their driver's licences. I guess they missed this part of the judgement: "In my view, courts would be failing in their duties were they to overlook and/or condone flagrant and deliberate contraventions of statutory provisions. If in fact there are other associations and/or estates in the country who, like the first respondent herein, either through ignorance or plain arrogance on their part, have seen it fit not to comply with statutory provisions, it’s time that they did."
Click to expand...

my estate resumed speed trapping AND pulling residents off the road to check their driver's licences
Click to expand...
what no breathalyser ?
 
There is a provision in their traffic rules regarding driving under the influence, so I guess a breathalyser's next..
 
Regarding rules, a lot of residents bought into the state long before the HOA realised the revenue potential in private speed trapping. So they would have every right to challenge these rules. Not that they would have to, considering that the high court has ruled that contracts disregarding national legislation are illegal. Their ruling has the effect of a court order.
 
Quid Pro Quo said:
Regarding rules, a lot of residents bought into the state long before the HOA realised the revenue potential in private speed trapping. So they would have every right to challenge these rules. Not that they would have to, considering that the high court has ruled that contracts disregarding national legislation are illegal. Their ruling has the effect of a court order.
Click to expand...
Smile and wave as you drive by there ilegal road block.

If they stop you, give them the court ruling printed on a A0 in big bold typeface.
 
f2wohf said:
Just don't stop and don't pay the fines.

They can take you to court and you'll laugh at them!

I had the same issue with my body corporate enforcing illegal rules about animals (basically making my dogs illegal, which is illegal). I told them I won't comply, they threatened to kick me out and nothing happened since they actually have no right to kick my dogs or me nor to enforce an illegal provision.
Click to expand...

A bit off topic, but was these rules related to spayed or neutered pets?

We have these rules in our complex too.
 
The directors and estate management are fully aware of the judgement. The judge remarked: "..either through ignorance or plain arrogance on their part, have seen it fit not to comply with statutory provisions.." In this case it must be arrogance.
 
Zophos said:
A bit off topic, but was these rules related to spayed or neutered pets?

We have these rules in our complex too.
Click to expand...

No, they made the possession of dogs illegal even though the dogs were brought in at a time where it was explicitly authorized to have animals.

Court rulings say that you can't forbid dogs and cats if they're not a nuisance and that the onus is on the body corporate to prove the nuisance meaning that you can't make a blanket interdiction as they did.

Next step, they sent to all the dog owners notices saying that their dogs must be expelled or to face consequences.

Nobody complied and 6 months after, we still wait for consequences.

I'd actually have a lot of fun if they went to court since the whole annual meeting where it was voted was illegal (no proper notifications), in addition of the interdiction itself being illegal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X