86km in a 100km zone = speeding ticket?

[kunoichi]

GAAAH! :mad:
Ok so there i was, my L plate on the bike, coming in from a double shift i just pulled at work and was doing 86k in a 100k zone just after the bridge heading north, and all of a sudden a get a freaking cop pulling me over telling me that despite the fact that i am just going with the flow of traffic i shouldn't b doing more than 70!! I was like...ya i know...but it's dangerous for me, a new biker to have freaking cars beeping at me in a 100k zone as i totter along at bloody 70 freaking k!! i wasn't being stupid, nor dangerous, i was actually just freaking putting my saftey first and going with the freaking flow!! :argh::angry2:

[davebullet]

So... did he let you off with a warning or a ticket? My advice - ditch the L plate. If you look confident enough on a bike you won't attract attention.

[sleemanj]

If you actually got a ticket (come on, how, you're a chick, on a bike, being sensible, should be a push over for a warning!), then I'd be appealing it.

It's well established that the 70k limit is dangerous and destined for the scrap heap when the politicians get around to it.

[kunoichi]

a ticket! Old mofo with nothing better to do i'm guessing! the only reason y i still got my L plate on is that i wanna sell my bike soon and need to have insurance incase i crash. I can't afford not to have insurance atm!

[sleemanj]

Rude! I think there's probably an address on the ticket you can write to. I would do that. Nuts.

[Racer X]

GAAAH! :mad:
Ok so there i was, my L plate on the bike, coming in from a double shift i just pulled at work and was doing 86k in a 100k zone just after the bridge heading north, and all of a sudden a get a freaking cop pulling me over telling me that despite the fact that i am just going with the flow of traffic i shouldn't b doing more than 70!! I was like...ya i know...but it's dangerous for me, a new biker to have freaking cars beeping at me in a 100k zone as i totter along at bloody 70 freaking k!! i wasn't being stupid, nor dangerous, i was actually just freaking putting my saftey first and going with the freaking flow!! :argh::angry2:

Welcome to NZ in 2009, where cops are bigger assholes than ever ...

[kunoichi]

If you actually got a ticket (come on, how, you're a chick, on a bike, being sensible, should be a push over for a warning!), then I'd be appealing it.

It's well established that the 70k limit is dangerous and destined for the scrap heap when the politicians get around to it.

unfortunatly it was an old muppet, and i wasn't being rude in any way, i was expecting just a warning until he asked for my license! then i just simmered away in my helmet! :angry2:

anyways, this is my first ticket, and i don't know anything about procedures or how to appeal. explain or link please?

[Laxi]

a ticket! Old mofo with nothing better to do i'm guessing! the only reason y i still got my L plate on is that i wanna sell my bike soon and need to have insurance incase i crash. I can't afford not to have insurance atm!

ditch the L plate, keep it under your seat, slap it on before the cops get there if you have an accident, more hassle than they're worth

[FJRider]

Read the back of the ticket...

[boomer]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

If I chose to import cocaine and get caught should i elect to be let off..because its dangerous to snort other peoples cocaine?

[kunoichi]

quick question, has anybody been successful in an appeal?

[short-circuit]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

If I chose to import cocaine and get caught should i elect to be let off..because its dangerous to snort other peoples cocaine?


Picking on noobz on a Saturday night....


Sucks to be you Bummer

[sleemanj]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

Laws are not absolute, nor are they infallible, laws need to be examined and tested. If everybody just sat and did what the law said and never bothered to argue it, then we would quickly wind up in some police state situation where you never question anything.

This particular law is WIDELY recognised to be a bad one (by organisations that matter), and the ONLY reason it's still around is because no politician has got around to finishing the job of removing it. Appealing this ticket is ABSOLUTELY the right thing to do.

If this young lady was exceeding the REAL speed limit (100k) you'd have a point, but she wasn't she was 15k's UNDER it.

[mowgli]

quick question, has anybody been successful in an appeal?
I doubt it. The law may be an ass but it's still the law and you broke it.

[sleemanj]

I doubt it. The law may be an ass but it's still the law and you broke it.

What do you have to lose by trying though. Nothing. And it has every chance of if not success then to bringing the issue to the forefront.

[kunoichi]

i don't suppose it'll cost me anything to make an appeal, other than more time to round up the money i need if it isn't written off. Besides i drive a car and ride a bike, and in almost 5 years worth of being on the road have never been fined. Perhaps that will help. I'm not an aggressive cager or rider.

[BIG DOUG]

will I got two speeding tickets yesterday in the work van,one for doing 118km in a double passing lane as I passed two vechicles ,and the cop was a prick as I explained about the guy on the inside who had speed up but he said you are only allowed to do 110km when you are passing I said more people would be killed if this was the case and I just looked at the road code no mention of this there hmm might have to go to court to clear this up and I agree ditch the plate just say it fell off.

[mowgli]

What do you have to lose by trying though. Nothing. And it has every chance of if not success then to bringing the issue to the forefront.
Okay, so kunoichi can spend the next couple of months consumed by this issue, appear in court and ultimately pay the fine plus court costs, or she can pay the fine and spend her time more productively considering her next bike. I know what I'd choose.

[pzkpfw]

The point of the law, I think, is that you just shouldn't go in a place that requires 100 km/h. You are expected to get more experience (and the next stage of the license) before going into that 100 km/h zone.

It's not (meant to be) about dangerously forcing you to be in a 100 km/h zone and holding up traffic by doing 70 km/h.

To be blunt: Tough luck.

When I was on an "L" plate, I went from Tawa to Wellington CBD "the back way" - the back road to J'Ville (which is now a 70 km/h zone anyway) and then through the speed limited streets of J'Ville to Ngaio to Kaiwharawhara etc ...

Sure it sucked, but that was my tough luck for not having a full license. If I didn't like it, I could have taken a train.


Sorry, but what would be the grounds for appeal for this ticket?

[kunoichi]

yeah i must say that if we just accepted law without question whe wouldn't of made the advancements we have made and hopefully continue to make. u should appeal for everything. I got a message from the justice department saying i had 3 parking fines over due and they were adding another 100 bux to each because i am far overdue in paying them. I went in there and explained i never got the mail, they checked my email address and realised they had the wrong one! So there, the justice department isn't flawless! i still have 2 parking fines that was my fault, but knocking off over 300 bux was definatly worth a trip to the department.

[vindy500]

boo hoo you broke a law you knew about, and got pinged, why the thread

[sleemanj]

Okay, so kunoichi can spend the next couple of months consumed by this issue, appear in court and ultimately pay the fine plus court costs, or she can pay the fine and spend her time more productively considering her next bike. I know what I'd choose.

Who said anything about court. Write a letter, politely and logically laying out the reasons for the objection to the ticket. If they accept the reason, awesome, if they don't, pay the ticket - she'd at least registered her objection.

You don't get pulled to court just because you voice an objection.

[mowgli]

Please clarify whether you were stung with exceeding the limit by 15-20km ($120) or breach of licence conditions ($400). If it's the first then the ticket is effectively void. Trouble is if you challenge it you'll probably get hit with the second one in the mail.

[kunoichi]

He said the ticket would be mailed to me. I don't know the cost just yet, i just wanted to get home. Anyways, this is turning into the typical sarcastic, none-too helpful typa thread from the majority of Kber's. I just wanted some different perspectives about what i should do and what my options are (being completely new to this). Thanks to everyone that gave some useful advice rather than just wasting away a saturday night with bitter sarcasm at the expence of others.

[mowgli]

Who said anything about court. Write a letter, politely and logically laying out the reasons for the objection to the ticket. If they accept the reason, awesome, if they don't, pay the ticket - she'd at least registered her objection.

You don't get pulled to court just because you voice an objection.
So you'd advocate objecting on principle alone? I wouldn't bother unless I was prepared to go to court. In this case a law was clearly broken and IMO court would be a waste of time. I'd take the hit and move on.

[Jantar]

He said the ticket would be mailed to me. ....
In that case do not assume that you ARE going to get a ticket. Chances are that he has stopped you, frightened you, and his job is done. There is a high probability that if that was your only offence then you won't get a ticket. Not all cops are pricks, just those in Rodney, Nelson district and Central Otago.

[muppitt]

snap off L plate. if you get pulled itmust have just happen orifis, i must get a new one right away;)

[boomer]

Laws are not absolute, nor are they infallible, laws need to be examined and tested. If everybody just sat and did what the law said and never bothered to argue it, then we would quickly wind up in some police state situation where you never question anything.

This particular law is WIDELY recognised to be a bad one (by organisations that matter), and the ONLY reason it's still around is because no politician has got around to finishing the job of removing it. Appealing this ticket is ABSOLUTELY the right thing to do.

If this young lady was exceeding the REAL speed limit (100k) you'd have a point, but she wasn't she was 15k's UNDER it.


in that case im about to register a new company !!!

Cocain imports Ltd

care to be my first customer?

[kunoichi]

In that case do not assume that you ARE going to get a ticket. Chances are that he has stopped you, frightened you, and his job is done.

Well i hope u'r right on that one! he didn't come off as a prick to me, other than the fact he pulled me over in the first place. It's time to play the waiting game i guess.

[Max Preload]

Another one out there winning hearts and minds, eh.... and they wonder why we don't stop...

[PirateJafa]

Rude! I think there's probably an address on the ticket you can write to. I would do that. Nuts.


quick question, has anybody been successful in an appeal?


Laws are not absolute, nor are they infallible, laws need to be examined and tested. If everybody just sat and did what the law said and never bothered to argue it, then we would quickly wind up in some police state situation where you never question anything.

This particular law is WIDELY recognised to be a bad one (by organisations that matter), and the ONLY reason it's still around is because no politician has got around to finishing the job of removing it. Appealing this ticket is ABSOLUTELY the right thing to do.

If this young lady was exceeding the REAL speed limit (100k) you'd have a point, but she wasn't she was 15k's UNDER it.

Bollocks.

I'd expect a reply along the lines of "Don't go into zones above your learner speed limit then, and don't exceed the speed limit again either. Thank you."

Appealing will NOT work. You cannot appeal a ticket simply because you don't like the LAW. Otherwise I'd be appealing the ticket that I will get tomorrow for doing 210km/h in a 50 zone on my commute just because I don't like that law.

Apply some common sense, and don't suggest that the poor girl wastes her time on a hopeless cause. Jantar's scenario is unlikely (but possible), and is the best she can hope for.

[Phurrball]

A very unfortunate and quite ratshit ticket for an offence that should not be on the books. $400 and 25?

Unlikely you'll get off this - the rule is pretty clear and you broke it (Unless there is some fault in the issue of the ticket - possible, but not likely)

I'd loose the the 'L' personally.

You'd be risking the same fine and demerits, but with less chance of being 'picked on' for an obvious (if daft) offence. The old 'It must've fallen off' may work too, especially if there's a bit of yellow plastic still attached (Maybe get a twin pack of 'L' plates ;))

Unlikely that an insurer would (or could?) avoid a claim because of a missing 'L' plate. Pretty sure they could break off pretty easily in a crash?

An insurance industry type may wish to flesh this out a little. IIRC the Insurance Law Reform Act precludes avoidance of a claim on immaterial matters - I can't see how an 'L' plate could ever be material in a crash?

[kunoichi]

To be honest, i see the validity of all the arguments made here, and see the reasoning behind what everyone says. However i don't have enough experience to object or support any of the points made. But now i'm atleast aware of them, and know, somewhat, what i should look at expecting. Cheers guys. :2thumbsup

[Max Preload]

boo hoo you broke a law you knew about, and got pinged, why the thread

What kind of a snivelling little goody-two-shoes turd are you?

[Aaron_newrider]

That's absolute crap - and it's the reason I don't wear a L plate. I go 110 daily, so would risk 400 bucks a day in fines.

Yes I risk the 400 fine for not realing an L plate, but you gotta do something stupid to get pulled over.

Fight the ticket - fuckers......

[XRVrider]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

If I chose to import cocaine and get caught should i elect to be let off..because its dangerous to snort other peoples cocaine?

Well boomer is right :eek5: , you broke the law. Maybe should avoid the 100km zones until have a restricted licence.

As for the cocaine, Boomer, wtf? Dude you got to lay off something.

[meteor]

You broke the law, that law is a bit of an ass, but it's there. And getting a warning is not a rite. All about attitude most of the time, cops or yours. Maybe that old cop would tell a different story. You risked it, cest la vie. Anywho, there's a lot of learner riders who did their 6 months or so and may not have attach their L plates... not me tho! Ask any tester how many very new looking L plates show up on restricted day! Your risk. Otherwise, stay to roads where you can ride.

[davebullet]

Do you know how much effort is required for an appeal (I don't - never done it). I've only ever written in to get off a no registration fine on the cage, citing I was on my way to purchase it (which I did same day but after the ticket was issued). That got me off the fine.

Depending on the fine you receive, it might warrant the effort of an appeal.

Use the time to think of the reason for your appeal. It is unlikely to be successful purely on the grounds of what we think makes for a common sense law (or not in this case).

[scumdog]

That's absolute crap - and it's the reason I don't wear a L plate. I go 110 daily, so would risk 400 bucks a day in fines.

Yes I risk the 400 fine for not realing an L plate, but you gotta do something stupid to get pulled over.

Fight the ticket - fuckers......

Hooo-boy, the day you get snapped for 113kph is going to be an expensive one....:weep:

[scumdog]

Bollocks.

I'd expect a reply along the lines of "Don't go into zones above your learner speed limit then, and don't exceed the speed limit again either. Thank you."

Appealing will NOT work. You cannot appeal a ticket simply because you don't like the LAW. Otherwise I'd be appealing the ticket that I will get tomorrow for doing 210km/h in a 50 zone on my commute just because I don't like that law.

Apply some common sense, and don't suggest that the poor girl wastes her time on a hopeless cause. Jantar's scenario is unlikely (but possible), and is the best she can hope for.

Must spread rep yadda yadda yadda..

Top post.

[ynot slow]

Basically write in,but be prepared to bend over and take it.

As an aside with you having never got a ticket,do not pay the fine till you get the printed ticket,that way you have 2 months to pay basically,on the back it states pay this with in 28 days,but the printed one will show payment date on it.

Maybe have a piece of wire twisted on the place where the L plate goes,if pulled over say "must have fallen off,here is one piece of tie".

[YellowDog]

Must spread rep yadda yadda yadda..

Top post.
Agreed.

If the flattering of eyelashes or flashing some cleavage fails, 99/100 I'd say "Pay the Fine".

BUT I do agree that 70kph for the area in question is a dangerous speed and also, there is actually no other route from the CBD to the Shore without crossing 100kph zones; which in itself is a potential grounds for an appeal.

[mowgli]

BUT I do agree that 70kph for the area in question is a dangerous speed and also, there is actually no other route from the CBD to the Shore without crossing 100kph zones; which in itself is a potential grounds for an appeal.
Nah, no grounds for appeal unless the bike is the only means available. Take the cage or bus would be their response.

[Hawkeye]

When I was on an "L" plate, I went from Tawa to Wellington CBD "the back way" - the back road to J'Ville (which is now a 70 km/h zone anyway) and then through the speed limited streets of J'Ville to Ngaio to Kaiwharawhara etc ...




That is the only way a 'learner' can go to the CBD from Tawa. (apart from down the gorge and along wellington. From Poriua to the top of the gorge, SH1 is a motorway which specifically excludes learners from using it. At the top of the gorge it changes to a highway (which allows learners/cyclist/joggers) and then once passed the slip road at the bottom, changes back to motorway.

[Mom]

When I was on an "L" plate, I went from Tawa to Wellington CBD "the back way" - the back road to J'Ville (which is now a 70 km/h zone anyway) and then through the speed limited streets of J'Ville to Ngaio to Kaiwharawhara etc ...
Sorry, but what would be the grounds for appeal for this ticket?

If a ticket gets issued there would be absolutely no grounds to appeal it. Pretty plain breach of license conditions really.

As far as taking an alternative route, if this young lady has to cross the Harbour Bridge to get where she needs to go to work or uni, there is no alternative route that does not involve an aspect of open road speed. Bus would be the only alternative.


He said the ticket would be mailed to me.

Bugger about being pulled up mate. Lets hope you passed the "attitude" test and you do not receive that little bit of paper in the mail eh? If it does arrive I would risk writing a letter in about it, stating all the current official type talk around regarding the 70kph rule being dangerous for motorcyclists, how it is possibly going to be repealled etc. Your clean driving/riding history etc and asking if they will reconsider the infringement in this case.

May not do any good, but certainly wont do any harm either.

[discotex]

Yes I risk the 400 fine for not realing an L plate, but you gotta do something stupid to get pulled over.

No L plate + over 70km/h = $800 fine and no amount of appealing will get you out of it.

You don't have to do something stupid to get pulled over. You just have to be unlucky.

I took the risk and got away with it. I know a fair few who've been busted on the motorways doing nothing other than going 100km/h in the slow lane.

[Owl]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

If I chose to import cocaine and get caught should i elect to be let off..because its dangerous to snort other peoples cocaine?


in that case im about to register a new company !!!

Cocain imports Ltd

care to be my first customer?

I'm not up with the cocaine laws, so maybe you too could pay $22.20 and apply for an exemption. Obviously all laws are created equal, right?

[kunoichi]

Yeah i work and study south of the bridge and live on the shore, so going through a 100km zone is inevitable. I don't think i was being particularly rude, i just said that i was working my way through to the left lane intending to slow down (actually intending to get off at the esmond off ramp) and i saw a car behind mimicking my movement so assumed it was a cop too late. He just said that i was still breeching licence conditions and asked for my licence.

Anyway, yes i think i will right in, but i'm not prepared to drag it to court.

Oh and cheers on the advice on the payment procedure date. I would of been incredibly confused and skipped out on a few more meals to get the fine payed in 28 days. LOL....life as a student a.

[short-circuit]

I'm not up with the cocaine laws, so maybe you too could pay $22.20 and apply for an exemption. Obviously all laws are created equal, right?

He's just a cock who can't help himself

[grusomhat]

That really sucks and it's probably the first time I've heard of someone being ticketed for the over 70km/h rule. I went from Napier to 90mile beach and back on my L doing the posted speed limit and didn't get any attention from the cops.

Will be good to see when they finally have it scrapped.

[EnzoYug]

1. I was told that speeding is not a straight breach of your license conditions as it was measured by "k's over the speed limit' and on an L plate the 70km is a speed limit that is part of your license, just as the posted "50" is everywhere else.

2. I appealed and got off on the basis that I was following the full letter of the law with L plates and such, and whilst traveling at 70k on the Ackl Harbour bridge had an asshole get right up behind me and give me shit. As there was no where to go on the bridge, the only option was to speed up to the speed limit.

3. This was accepted as the prudent action required to avoid an accident and I got off.

4. This was years ago, horses for courses etc... in no way guaranteed.

5. Your fine will probably be a bit more - so be aware that you might just have to bit it.

6. This is the only time I have ever been pulled over and despite a few charges on my record I still maintain ZERO speeding tickets. Oh yeeahh.

[MSTRS]

Yeah i work and study south of the bridge and live on the shore, so going through a 100km zone is inevitable. I don't think i was being particularly rude, i just said that i was working my way through to the left lane intending to slow down (actually intending to get off at the esmond off ramp) and i saw a car behind mimicking my movement so assumed it was a cop too late. He just said that i was still breeching licence conditions and asked for my licence.

Anyway, yes i think i will right in, but i'm not prepared to drag it to court.


Do nothing.
Until or unless a ticket arrives in the mail. All that exists in the 'system' at this stage is a note in the cop's little book. Writing now would be difficult to cross-reference with their records, and may simply draw attention to the 'offence'.
I repeat...do nothing. Yet.

If a ticket does arrive, then appeal the fuck out of it. Depending on where it was issued, you have an excellent chance of getting it revoked if you can prove that the risk to your health and well-being outweighed the heinous crime of exceeding 70kph.

This condition was made law at a time when it reasonably practical to obey. The country's road network and traffic flows/speeds has moved on since then, making this condition downright dangerous in many situations. In the absence of any other reason for stopping a rider exceeding the 70, most cops understand this and ignore this breach.

[Hailwood]

Anyways, this is turning into the typical sarcastic, none-too helpful typa thread from the majority of Kber's. I just wanted some different perspectives about what i should do and what my options are (being completely new to this). Thanks to everyone that gave some useful advice rather than just wasting away a saturday night with bitter sarcasm at the expence of others.[/QUOTE]


Typical sarcastic? What is sarcastic about this? You broke a law, you got caught...end of story..You are on a learner's licence which has conditions imposed because you as yet have not been deemed to be suitably skilled to have a full licence. You chose to break those conditions and got caught...there is no conspiracy, no poor me....actions and consequences..Its a voluntary option..you make a choice about your actions, you therefore take the consequences.

Whether the law is correct or not is another issue but until the law changes..suck it up plain and simple

[R6_kid]

Bottom line is you are on an L plate which has a restriction that you don't exceed more than 70kph. Knowingly taking a route which requires you to do more than this speed, even if it is considered to be 'safer', shows that you willingly did so.

It's not an 'oh shit i took a wrong turn at that intersection and ended up on the motorway'. Or, 'sorry, i wasn't watching my speed'. Perhaps you should start practicing your Paris Hilton impersonations just in case though, you never know - they might let you off.

Of course I'm being a hypocrit because I had my learners for 9mths and never had an L plate. Things have changed since then though, and my commute didn't involve using any roads with a speed limit of more than 70kph.

[p.dath]

GAAAH! :mad:
Ok so there i was, my L plate on the bike, coming in from a double shift i just pulled at work and was doing 86k in a 100k zone just after the bridge heading north...

Pretty much this means you are not licensed to go on that road. You need to stick to roads with a 70km/h or lower speed limit.

[bryce]

this is a message for big doug i was watching the news not so long ago and this reporter was interviewing the new zealands police comitioner about passing an the speed required to do so. he asked if passing a car doing 95km should i pass at 100km taking a very long time or should i increase my speed making a quick pass the cop said to do a quick pass he then asked if i got up to 120km would u pull me over and ticket me the cop with a funny look on his face (obviously not wanting to say) said no unless u maintain that speed after the pass. my nephew had a bike for ages and finally decided to get his bike licecnce got it and was riding home, after the sixth tanker almost blew him of the road he thought this is to dangerouse and decided to increse his speed. so we fully understand, and know the law silly. i appealed a fine with a letter didnt get of but didnt cost me anymore eaither so u may aswell have a go.

[SMOKEU]

Fuck the police

[_Shrek_]

Fuck the police

mmmmmmmmmmm what an intelligent thought :zzzz:

[_Shrek_]

Do nothing.
Until or unless a ticket arrives in the mail. All that exists in the 'system' at this stage is a note in the cop's little book. Writing now would be difficult to cross-reference with their records, and may simply draw attention to the 'offence'.
I repeat...do nothing. Yet.

he's right & you have near two months to write in if it does show up

[Creeping Death]

GAAAH! :mad:
i just pulled at work

Couldn't you wait till you got home?:cool:

[FROSTY]

OHH FFS-- A learner licence is called that for a very friggin good reason -its a licence to LEARN.
It is not a licence to go out on the motorway.
Are you lot ever gonna get that through ya skulls??
As for the Op's suggestion that it was "the only option " to break the law what utter bollox. There are alternative routes that do not involve going into a 100km/h zone.
Yes they would be "inconvenient" but guess what the law was created for a very good reason-TO KEEP YOU ALIVE LONG ENOUGH TO LEARN BASIC RIDING SKILLS.

[kunoichi]

Yes i don't intend to do anything until the ticket arrives, I took the 100km zone because it's the only way i know how to go from south of the harbour bridge to the north shore (the other route i know also goes across a 100km zone).

Either way, i'll write in and hope they mite let me off with a slap on the wrist for the 5 years of good behaviour on the road.

I completely understand everyone who says that i should just suck it up and pay, but i have a right to an appeal and so does everyone else. I choose to use that right.

[varminter]

Fuck the police

What, all of them, ok, you take the blokes and one's with facial hair, I'll work my way through the women. Go.

[carver]

a ticket! Old mofo with nothing better to do i'm guessing! the only reason y i still got my L plate on is that i wanna sell my bike soon and need to have insurance incase i crash. I can't afford not to have insurance atm!

next time use your assets

[Rockbuddy]

isnt the speed limit on and about the bridge 80kms???

[kunoichi]

isnt the speed limit on and about the bridge 80kms???

yes i was doing about 75 over the bridge (aparantly he was following me from there) and increased my speed slightly to 86km when i hit the 100km zone after the bridge heading north, i was merging into the left hand lanes to take the esmonde offramp exit and used that as an excuse saying i was trying to slow back down by going into the slow lane after the copper pulled me over.

But yes, i obviously wasn't on my game by not flaunting my assets! :p i didn't even bother taking my helmet off (which, come to think of it, he should of requested if he wanted to properly identify me from my license pic...)

[Jonno.]

Yes but northern motorway is 100k.

[crazyhorse]

...... buggar......

[mattian]

What do you have to lose by trying though. Nothing. And it has every chance of if not success then to bringing the issue to the forefront.

true if you have enough money to fund your little experiment........ it will inevitably cost more than the original ticket.
I say.... pay the fine, and ditch the L plate.
I rode my whole learner licence period without one. Sat at 100ks on the motorway everyday twice a day and never had any trouble.

[marty]

yes i was doing about 75 over the bridge (aparantly he was following me from there) and increased my speed slightly to 86km when i hit the 100km zone after the bridge heading north, i was merging into the left hand lanes to take the esmonde offramp exit and used that as an excuse saying i was trying to slow back down by going into the slow lane after the copper pulled me over.

But yes, i obviously wasn't on my game by not flaunting my assets! :p i didn't even bother taking my helmet off (which, come to think of it, he should of requested if he wanted to properly identify me from my license pic...)

so why didn't you take the stafford rd exit?

[The Pastor]

hang on, the road code says you are limited to 70km/hr on the open road

Now the way i read it is the open road is dictated when you see a sign like this.

<img src='http://www.pyrocam.com/filez/go/derestriction-sign.gif'>

Now from http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/about-limits/speed-limits.html

It says it applies to learners on the open road.


But then again, the road code is not law, and has little standing in court.

[TygerTung]

It was once illegal for woman to vote, now it is legal.

There is a good reason for people to question laws, and this particular law may not be such a good one.

[boomer]

It was once illegal for woman to vote, now it is legal.

There is a good reason for people to question laws, and this particular law may not be such a good one.



do eeeet.. burn your bra like i show you !

[MSTRS]

But then again, the road code is not law, and has little standing in court.

Uh huh....

[MarkH]

GAAAH! :mad:
Ok so there i was, my L plate on the bike, coming in from a double shift i just pulled at work and was doing 86k in a 100k zone just after the bridge heading north, and all of a sudden a get a freaking cop pulling me over telling me that despite the fact that i am just going with the flow of traffic i shouldn't b doing more than 70!! I was like...ya i know...but it's dangerous for me, a new biker to have freaking cars beeping at me in a 100k zone as i totter along at bloody 70 freaking k!! i wasn't being stupid, nor dangerous, i was actually just freaking putting my saftey first and going with the freaking flow!! :argh::angry2:

The law is stupid and the sooner it is revoked the better - but that doesn't help you.

If you write in then you should explain that you were only going with the flow of traffic for the sake of your personal safety. If that fails then simply pay the ticket.

How soon can you get your restricted? IMO the sooner the better - since you have to travel on a road that has a 100kph limit you really don't want to be restricted to 70kph. If it will be many months before you can upgrade your license then it could be worth inquiring about an exemption (I am sure someone on here can give info about whether this is possible or not). Just don't sit on your learners for years and then complain that you got ticketed again for breaching your license conditions.

[FROSTY]

There is a good reason for people to question laws, and this particular law may not be such a good one.
Suggest a BETTER law then dude.
A law that ensures that the lowest common denominator stays alive on the road.
15 years old lived in a city appartment.mum n dad only caught busses so no concept of rideing or road rules.
Its ok for that person to be allowed on the motorway or open highway at 100km/h ?
If ya think I'm beeing a nasty out of touch old prick then Im sorry if Im doing a katman onya.
As I posted earlier a learner licence is a licence to learn road riding skills.
The damage you do by "just" being allowed to go 30km/h faster isn't simpy adding a bit more damage if you crash it multiplys as you speed up
6 months is concidered to be a reasonable time to gather the skills needed to graduate to being restricted to "only" riding a 250

[MarkH]

but he said you are only allowed to do 110km when you are passing

This is not true at all - you are only allowed to do 100kph when passing on the open road, any more than that is illegal. Generally the police allow a 10kph tolerance and ignore the illegal speed up to the speed limit + 10, but that doesn't mean that 101kph while passing isn't illegal.

Of course sensible speed to pass may be different to legal speed, but the cops don't enforce sensible.

[red675]

why are you looking to appeal? you broke the law?!

some laws is made to be broke and some ain't

[CookMySock]

Just pay it, miss, and learn to hate the police.

Steve

[boomer]

some laws is made to be broke and some ain't


i agree.. i want to make my own cocaine..!

[Supermac Jr]

quick question, has anybody been successful in an appeal?

no

:crybaby:

[Cheshire Cat]

Get your bloody restricted already!!!:argh: :bleh:

[SPman]

The point of the law, I think, is that you just shouldn't go in a place that requires 100 km/h. You are expected to get more experience (and the next stage of the license) before going into that 100 km/h zone.

It's not (meant to be) about dangerously forcing you to be in a 100 km/h zone and holding up traffic by doing 70 km/h.

To be blunt: Tough luck.

And how the fuck do you get from the Shore to the City without using the motorway, unless you use the backroads around the top of the harbour and add an hour to the journey!

It's a fucking stupid law, (not) thought through by (perhaps) well intentioned lawmakers who don't really have a clue!

Write in and appeal, even though you probably won't get off, if only to have another protest on file!

[sleemanj]

Suggest a BETTER law then dude.

If the intent of the law is, as some people here suggest, limit you to low speed roads. Then make the law you can only travel on low speed roads.

Saying you can travel on any road you like (including high speed roads) as long as you're doing it low speed, invites trouble.

And if that's not the intent of the law, then ditch the law because it just doesn't make sense.

[marty]

there's on and off ramps in the 80k zone both north and southbound

it's the price you pay for being on a learners.

[pzkpfw]

And how the fuck do you get from the Shore to the City without using the motorway, ...

I've checked a map of Auckland.

I think if you use the backroads around the top of the harbour you'd be fine. You'd even get an extra hours riding experience out of it.

Or, you could take a bus, and get the experience a different way (weekends, maybe).

[FROSTY]

If the intent of the law is, as some people here suggest, limit you to low speed roads. Then make the law you can only travel on low speed roads.

Saying you can travel on any road you like (including high speed roads) as long as you're doing it low speed, invites trouble.

And if that's not the intent of the law, then ditch the law because it just doesn't make sense.
Ohh gosh yea isn't it such a stupid law. it actually requires a learner rider to USE THEIR BRAINS.
Hmm lemme think for a mo.
I'll change vehicle type for a mo to see if I can get the right impact.
Do you think a pilot with ZERO-30 hours flying skills should be flying into LAX or Heathrow airport?? I'll stand corrected but I believe both are "legally" able to be done on a restricted PPL
Or the same pilot doing carrier landings ?
NO??
Why ever not??
Ohh hang on could it be they don't have the skill level to deal with the hazards of doing so?
Bike riding is the only motor sport/transport where the person gets a bit of paper and id\s flying solo from there.
The 70km/h law might just keep a few of the LEARNER riders alive for awhile

[EnzoYug]

And how the fuck do you get from the Shore to the City without using the motorway, unless you use the backroads around the top of the harbour and add an hour to the journey!


You move house. Auckland isn't the beginning and end of the country.
I got off this law, but if you can't get off just take it on the chin.

If you play the game, you accept the rules.

[enigma51]

The road is not a racetrack slow the fuck down!

[sleemanj]

I'll change vehicle type for a mo to see if I can get the right impact. Do you think a pilot with ZERO-30 hours flying skills should be flying into LAX or Heathrow airport?? I'll stand corrected but I believe both are

Bad example.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a "Restricted" PPL. You can find the specifications for Pilot's licences in rule Part 61. Perhaps you are thinking of a Recreational Pilot's Licence, however in order attain this, you basically need to have had a PPL in the past and downgrade when your medical situation isn't looking 100% as the medical requirements are lesser.

Until somebody has a PPL they can't do much without specific permission from an instructor, good luck getting permission for a low hour student pilot from an instructor to do anything even remotely out of the student's capability. So, no, a 30 hr pilot can't just decide to rock up to LAX unless their instructor has specifically authorised that flight, in NZ for a start you need 50 hours flying time minimum to be eligable to take the PPL flight test.

Even with that said, good luck getting any lightie into Heathrow (without huge amounts of money), LAX may be a little more accommodating.

Finally in either case the professional controllers at both facilities would probably make flying into either airport VFR safer than flying at busy uncontrolled airfields. I would be more apprehensive about flying into Oshkosh during Airventure time than I would LAX.

[FROSTY]

Sleeman --EXACTLY my point.
-My memory is fucked but what do ya call a LEARNER pilot who hasn't done their cross countrys yet?? -still restricted to the local area.
You wouldn't get me flying a light aircraft into heathrow or LAX with the jetwash and heavy traffic in and out. Just like say ohh I dunno --a learner rider on the motorway in rushhour. Information overload.
Oshkosh is more like throwing a novice rider out on the track at a nationals meet with F1 F2 and F3 on the track at the same time

[Laxi]

motorcycling! the rebels hobby!:rofl:

[sleemanj]

Sleeman --EXACTLY my point.
-My memory is fucked but what do ya call a LEARNER pilot who hasn't done their cross countrys yet??


Usually, a student pilot still. It's technically possible at 40 hrs to sit your PPL and get it without endorsement for cross country, you're still a qualified pilot, you're just crap at navigating so any excursion away from the local area (don't know the distance, probably 50nm or something) will require approval. I'd be surprised if anybody gets a non-endorsed license in reality.



Just like say ohh I dunno --a learner rider on the motorway in rushhour. Information overload.


We do not disagree! I absolutely see that there are times and places for learner riders to be, and that the motorway in rush hour isn't one of them!

BUT, just saying "don't go faster than 70k" isn't enough, if you say that without also saying "and don't go to these places" then the message doesn't come through properly and we get people going on these bad places and either doing 70k and causing a danger, or doing 100k and breaking the law.

So what I'm saying is that this law is wrong, not because it's trying to limit learners, but because it's doing it in a terrible way.

Limiting roads, or conditions, or something else (I don't know, suggestions) would be great, some sort of better training before getting let loose than the BHS (which from memory of 17 years ago was surely some kind of joke) would be great, but just saying "go for it, just not faster than 70k" causes more problem than it seeks to solve, in my opinion.

In my opinion, and I accept that it's pretty contentious, the motorcycle graduated licence in NZ, is badly designed and it produces bad riders on the whole (and I freely admit I'm probably one of them, but at least I know it) because there is basically ZERO requirement for any training, it's all left up to the rider to figure out as they go along.

[Katman]

then Im sorry if Im doing a katman onya.


You wish.<hjvhjvhgv>

[MSTRS]

....F1 F2 and F3 on the track at the same time

Sounds just like any public road at any time of the day or night.
I don't often disagree with you, mate, and whilst I see exactly where you're coming from, I have to say that, overall, I think the 70kph learner thing is bad law. I say that, because it's intent is to restrict a learner to a speed that shouldn't overload their ability to control their machine. Great. It was eminently sensible and practical when it was imposed (early 80's?) but traffic volumes and driver behaviour has changed markedly in that time...meaning that anyone seriously out of step with the flow is risking potentially greater disaster than adding 25/30kph to their own speed and staying with the flow.
Do we have trouble with scooterists sitting to the left, doing 45 when 'everyone else' is doing 50+? Often enough, we do. Double the traffic speed and increase the differential...

[SixPackBack]

If you can't ride at 100kmh you should not be on the road........dumbest law ever!

[lanci]

My friend was unfortunate to be pulled over doing 114k in a 100k zone with no L plate on... The policeman said he was being kind by not taking his license for exceeding his 70k limit by 40k but a $855 ticket later... I guess that is kind.

[marty]

there's a lot of discussion about that. the 40k licence loss only occurs at 40k over the posted or actual speed limit. 70k is only a condition of the licence. exceeding this by any amount is $400/25 demerits. the $855 sounds like no L plate, exceeds 70k, and not producing his licence.

[DVS 69]

They are just a pack of wankers, ive had mega tickets this year, i drive alot everyday for work and see the strangest shit going on on "our" roads and wonder why i always get hammerd. In times past they used to let ya off with a warning now they just cant wait to get there little books out. Its a control thing they want everyone to be robots, i would happily take my tickets on the chin if i thought i was driving dangerous or recklessly but fark tickets on straight roads doing like 8 kph over the limit and no other traffic on the road ....... What a joke man :angry2:. Of course they all say .... Well you can write in and see what happens. Its a crock of shit they all back eachother to the hilt. Then again its the biggest legal gang in NZ.:oi-grr: One thing is for sure the controls and laws in this country are only gunna get worse. For the record i would consider myself to a be a normal hard working "kiwi" who pays a shitload of tax each year. Ive never had a insurance claim or even a car crash. Its a joke and its soo easy to feel picked on i arnt the nicest person to them when i get pulled up anymore cos there aint no point they gunna sting ya regardless.

[kunoichi]

BUT, just saying "don't go faster than 70k" isn't enough, if you say that without also saying "and don't go to these places" then the message doesn't come through properly and we get people going on these bad places and either doing 70k and causing a danger, or doing 100k and breaking the law.

So what I'm saying is that this law is wrong, not because it's trying to limit learners, but because it's doing it in a terrible way.

Limiting roads, or conditions, or something else (I don't know, suggestions) would be great, some sort of better training before getting let loose than the BHS (which from memory of 17 years ago was surely some kind of joke) would be great, but just saying "go for it, just not faster than 70k" causes more problem than it seeks to solve, in my opinion.

In my opinion, and I accept that it's pretty contentious, the motorcycle graduated licence in NZ, is badly designed and it produces bad riders on the whole (and I freely admit I'm probably one of them, but at least I know it) because there is basically ZERO requirement for any training, it's all left up to the rider to figure out as they go along.

I agree with you here. Firstly, if they limited the rule of the 70k coupled with only the use of 80k road max, then indeed i would of taken the last exit onto the bridge and taken the first exit after, but the law doesn't state that so you assume you have a right to be in the 100km zone. In my opinion, it is dangerous to be going at 70km while everyone is whisking past you, some even tooting their horns and giving you a bit of a scare, it's much easier to just go with the flow of traffic.
HOWEVER, i also agree that the way in which i got my license was NOT a safe one! Same goes for car drivers, my mother was thoroughly shocked when she found out that her 15 yr old daughter is legally allowed to drive a car (where i come from you wait till 18, go through coarses both in a car park as well as in traffic plus theory, with atleast 5 lessons on the road with a qualified instructor before hand). She booked me in for on road lessons after i passed my theory and only had me driving locally for nearly a year. When i went for my bike license i was looking to get some lessons on the road, but didn't find a school that offered that, i wasn't skilled enough to do an advance coarse on the road, but i couldn't really get the skill until i put my neck on the line and go it alone on the road for a while! I was baffled by the stupidity of this system and ended up having a mate ride with me home the first day (stalled atleast 10 times and he had to direct trafic around me as i figured my way out) then got him to give me some on road lessons. He's not a teacher and we didn't have intercoms, but that was the best i could get. I do think that the NZ licensing system does need another look through.

[MSTRS]

I agree with you here. Firstly, if they limited the rule of the 70k coupled with only the use of 80k road max, then indeed i would of taken the last exit onto the bridge and taken the first exit after, but the law doesn't state that so you assume you have a right to be in the 100km zone...
I say again, I think this is a bad law, but...
For the sake of contentious argument, I'm going to take a stance here.
Increasingly, nitpicky laws are being foisted on us, in an effort to address situations created by people failing to think for themselves. If you had the option of staying off 100kph zones, why didn't you? In the event that this 70kph condition stays in place, is there really any need to then add where you can't go? For many people all round the country, that would be a complete disaster. Not everyone has the option of using 50/70kph suburban arterial routes, you know.

[Mystic13]

The biggest problem with the 70k law is that most cagers don't know it and coming up behind a bike doing 75k often get quickly pissed at the idiot going slow.

Other than that I think the rule should be dropped because of the danger it poses to the rider.

If a bike rider needs to be limited to 70k then a car driver should also be restricted by the same argument. Especially since they have a cage to protect them.

Personally I give all "L" drivers and riders and very old people a bit of room.

[pzkpfw]

The biggest problem with the 70k law is that most cagers don't know it and coming up behind a bike doing 75k often get quickly pissed at the idiot going slow.

That still misses the point that the L-plate bike shouldn't be there in the first place.

The idiot, sorry, is that rider.

[FROSTY]

I think there is a basic breakdown in perception of what a Learner licence is for.
I really feel this is at the very CORE of the disagreement here and elsewhere.
Those that are argueing that 70km/h is unsafe I think believe that a L licence is a licence to RIDE.
I agree 100% that if that is the intent of a L licence then 70km/h is rediculous.
However if it is as I believe it is a licence to LEARN to ride then its very cleverly phrased.
If an L plate rider is FORCED to abide 100% by the 70km/h restriction then they must restrict their rideing to places and TIMES that are safe (as safe as biking ever is) to do so.

In other words if you are on a road with cars buzzing by 30km/h faster than you-- YOU are on the wrong road.

I feel to get with the times the CURRENT restriction needs to stay with perhaps a note to the effect.

"ALL L plate riders must ride no faster than 70km/h and must do so at times and places where it is safe to do so."
OMG I HEAR YOU SCREAM we MUST ACTUALLY ACCEPT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY--NO we can't have that.

I"ll post up later why I feel we MUST get our respective heads out of OUR arses to prevent the government interfereing.

AGAIN--and Im sorry if it seems a bad comparisson WOULD YOU LET A NOVICE PILOT FLY INTO A MAJOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT??
I argue the answer is no. The cost of an error is just too great
So WHY IN HELL would anyone want a NOVICE rider out there on for example Aucklands busy motorways??

The OP offers a perfect example of making CHOICES based on what is CONVENIENT to her.AS a minimum she could have gone on and off the motorway where it is a 80km/h zone. ( for those of you from out of town there is a section of auckland motorway directly before and after the harbour bridge restricted to 80km/h) ie last onramp before the bridge then off at the first available offramp. She chose not to. There was also the option to go via west auckland where currently there is a section of double lane highway at 80km/h with a VERYwide sealed edge on it.
The law in this case is NOT a farce.and quite frankly isn't open to interpretation.
What is a farce is those that think that by weaving through some cones a couple of times and scratcheeing at the local testing place that they are suddenly capable of safely riding a motorcycle. Guess what -they ARE NOT.
Please don't quote the EXCEPTIONS to the rules.--Im raising five of them. My kids can all (bar perhps mr 5) ride motorcycles with a fair degree of competence. One of them has demonstrated he is capable of riding with quite good skill at up to 120km/h (on Taupo track)

Isn't it mind blowing --we have such a nanny state in so many ways yet we have such relaxed laws re bike licencing.

One final note---Do we REALLY want the microscope to be pointed over the licencing laws?
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that they are likely to get MORE not less restrictive given the statistics re accident rates and time on bike.

[FROSTY]

I agree with you here. Firstly, if they limited the rule of the 70k coupled with only the use of 80k road max, then indeed i would of taken the last exit onto the bridge and taken the first exit after, but the law doesn't state that so you assume you have a right to be in the 100km zone. In my opinion, it is dangerous to be going at 70km while everyone is whisking past you, some even tooting their horns and giving you a bit of a scare, it's much easier to just go with the flow of traffic.
THERE IT IS IN PLAIN ENGLISH!!!!
wHY DID you NOT TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ACTIONS???

[kunoichi]

Well i am aren't I!? I'm paying the bloody ticket! This thread has developed beyond my ticket into a discussion of the actual law! No need to bloody well yell at me about being irrisponsible if i'm paying the bloody ticket!:oi-grr:

[kunoichi]

Oh and perhaps I could get some opinions about the licensing system in NZ. I explained it in my last post. Frosty, i'v been reading your posts from when i first joined KB and have high regards for your opinion. But like i said, this thread has gone beyond my ticket into a discussion of the actual law and now i'm bringing in the licencing system into it. I know u said that u think the core issue is the misinterpretation of what the L plate means, I find it hard to believe that even cagers don't know what the L plate means, but i'm starting to think the flaw might be in the licensing system itself, where there is inadequate training for both cagers and motorcyclists and yes, definatly scooters. Its more of 'ok u know the rules, now go and practice, hope u dont' get killed doing it!'

[MSTRS]

I think there is a basic breakdown in perception of what a Learner licence is for.
I really feel this is at the very CORE of the disagreement here and elsewhere.
Those that are argueing that 70km/h is unsafe I think believe that a L licence is a licence to RIDE.
I agree 100% that if that is the intent of a L licence then 70km/h is rediculous.
However if it is as I believe it is a licence to LEARN to ride then its very cleverly phrased.


It is a licence to ride. With certain provisions, in deference to the undeveloped abilities of the licence holder.
The provisions are
1. Must display an L
2. Must not carry a pillion
3. Must not ride larger than 250cc
4. Must not ride between 10pm and 5am
5. Must not exceed 70kph

I agree with the display, size and pillion ones, am ambivalent about the hours one, but less so about the speed one.

[MSTRS]

...the flaw might be in the licensing system itself, where there is inadequate training for both cagers and motorcyclists and yes, definatly scooters. Its more of 'ok u know the rules, now go and practice, hope u dont' get killed doing it!'

There is plenty of training available for car drivers. But it can be expensive, and is not mandatory.
There is NOT much available for motorcycles, even in the large centres. This is why KB can be a godsend to beginners.
The fact that anyone with car licence can ride a low-powered scooter is wrong tho. Afterall, barring the potential speed, what is the difference (for the rider) between a scooter and a full motorcycle? In terms of the machine's abilities and rider vulnerability?

[steve_t]

It is a licence to ride. With certain provisions, in deference to the undeveloped abilities of the licence holder.
The provisions are
1. Must display an L
2. Must not carry a pillion
3. Must not ride larger than 250cc
4. Must not ride between 10pm and 5am
5. Must not exceed 70kph

I agree with the display, size and pillion ones, am ambivalent about the hours one, but less so about the speed one.

I was always wondering about the hours one too. I'd think that between 10pm-5am, there'd be less traffic around and thus be a bit safer. Or are they worried that L plate riders will go into Cul-de-sacs with bottles of diesel in the wee hours? :eek5:

[marty]

Well i am aren't I!? I'm paying the bloody ticket! This thread has developed beyond my ticket into a discussion of the actual law! No need to bloody well yell at me about being irrisponsible if i'm paying the bloody ticket!:oi-grr:

2 questions.

1.have you actually received the ticket yet?
2. how long have you been on a learner licence? when can you get a restricted?

well that's actually 3, fill ya boots though :)

[kunoichi]

no i haven't actually. Said it would take between 3-5 working days to get to me, so i'll give it till friday.

I got a pm from someone saying that through out the fines he did get, the two where they said they would mail the ticket, he never actually recieved. I'm hoping it'll b the same for me. I'm booking in for my restricted this week. Instead of giving me a warning so i would slow down, i'm going to go ahead and make it legal for me to speed up!! LOL! talk about backfire!

[MSTRS]

I was always wondering about the hours one too. I'd think that between 10pm-5am, there'd be less traffic around and thus be a bit safer.
I think it is because (generally) people are not nocturnal, and be 10pm most people are getting tired. Couple that with under-developed skills. No prizes there. The problem I have with it is that everyone is not the same, and there are plenty of people that work some sort of night shift, which makes that time restriction very onerous.


1.have you actually received the ticket yet?


Wondering that myself. And repeat advice to do nothing unless etc.

[MarkH]

I'm booking in for my restricted this week. Instead of giving me a warning so i would slow down, i'm going to go ahead and make it legal for me to speed up!! LOL! talk about backfire!

That is the most sensible action you could take :niceone:
Good luck on the restricted!

[marty]

no i haven't actually. Said it would take between 3-5 working days to get to me, so i'll give it till friday.

I got a pm from someone saying that through out the fines he did get, the two where they said they would mail the ticket, he never actually recieved. I'm hoping it'll b the same for me. I'm booking in for my restricted this week. Instead of giving me a warning so i would slow down, i'm going to go ahead and make it legal for me to speed up!! LOL! talk about backfire!

right. so if you DO get the ticket, then write in saying 'i have been unable to free up time/couldn't be fucked/get my hair dry (delete as appropriate) to book in for my 6R, however this experience has encouraged me to do so - I have been entitled to sit my 6R for (however long) and I have learned a good lesson that I will pass on to my peers. Please consider withdrawing the breach ticket on these grounds.

[h211]

Bad luck. Was in the same situation today heading to do my restricted test but didnt get pulled over, thankfully. Appeal it, im sure someone will see the sense...

[kunoichi]

Hm, i don't really think it'll work too well, point was that i was breeching the license i was on. But i'll give it a go. Cheers

[Owl]

I think there is a basic breakdown in perception of what a Learner licence is for.
I really feel this is at the very CORE of the disagreement here and elsewhere.
Those that are argueing that 70km/h is unsafe I think believe that a L licence is a licence to RIDE.
I agree 100% that if that is the intent of a L licence then 70km/h is rediculous.
However if it is as I believe it is a licence to LEARN to ride then its very cleverly phrased.
If an L plate rider is FORCED to abide 100% by the 70km/h restriction then they must restrict their rideing to places and TIMES that are safe (as safe as biking ever is) to do so.

Bollocks!

My partner recently sat her restricted and was told to ignore the 70kph rule by the testing officer and ride at 100kph . The road code tells you that you'll be tested on the open road for your restricted.

Are you suggesting that the first time a learner rides at 100kph, it should be done during their restricted test?

Real good law!:laugh:

[FROSTY]

Actually I'd like to start a new thread about the licencing laws.

[MSTRS]

Hm, i don't really think it'll work too well, point was that i was breeching the license i was on. But i'll give it a go. Cheers

In the event that you are issued a ticket, you should write in. As with any breach, there may be extenuating circumstances that the issuing officer doesn't care about, but the reviewing officer may. If you have already sat and passed your 6R in the meantime, then that is a point in your favour. If nothing else, it allows you a little extra time to save the pingers.

[CM2005]

Ditch the L plate asap

[imdying]

I really feel this is at the very CORE of the disagreement here and elsewhere. Naw, the disagreement here is some people think that people should be able to think for themselves, and take from the 70km/hr limit that they shouldn't be riding in 70km/hr zones, and the other group (or rather don't/can't/won't for themselves) think that the law should spell out everything in minute detail for them.

You advocate thinking for yourself, and they advocate the nanny state... pretty simple really.

[MSTRS]

Actually I'd like to start a new thread about the licencing laws.

We have this one... http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=75488
And this one... http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=102470
And this one... http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=89948

But with the talk of a total revamp going before Parliament at some stage, including changing to the Oz type of HP rating, is there much point?

[imdying]

Are you suggesting that the first time a learner rides at 100kph, it should be done during their restricted test?Why not? If they can't manage it, are you suggesting they should be given a restricted license in any case?

[MSTRS]

Why not? If they can't manage it, are you suggesting they should be given a restricted license in any case?

The problem is that a licence stage is there to allow you to practice. Whilst you are riding. If you are not allowed to practice the higher speed, then it is unfair to test you on it. Eh?

[FROSTY]

Bollocks!

My partner recently sat her restricted and was told to ignore the 70kph rule by the testing officer and ride at 100kph . The road code tells you that you'll be tested on the open road for your restricted.

Are you suggesting that the first time a learner rides at 100kph, it should be done during their restricted test?

Real good law!:laugh:
I'm saying that a person with NO riding skills --NONE ZERO NADA should not b allowed to ride in situations that they are incapable of dealing with in an emergency situation.
Its about developing the skill to a level where you are capable of dealing with these situations.
Ok much as I HATE statistics (the gubinment loves twisating em)
Why is it that you are at highest risk of accident as a learner rider?
BY risk m saying statisticly speaking the greatest numbers of DEATHS and injuries are occurring amongst those in their first 12 months of riding.
You are advocating a change to the law that indeed supports personal freedom-- HOORAHH
Yep lets change the law so a rider with the lil slip of paper can go out on the motorways. Fantastic idea
Doncha gettit??. If they are allowed to by law --they WILL
Answer this honestly dude. Would you be happy for your partner to tackle rushhour traffic at night in the rain ??
Change the law to 100km/h and she will be legally allowed to do this therefore a percentage of riders WILL do this.
Currently there is a "fear factor" of getting caught.keeping things in check a little.
THen they blame everybody else but themselves or worse theyre dead .
Now to answer your question -
I'm gobsmacked that a testing officer would advocate a rider riding at a speed they have NEVER been able to legally ride at. Quite simply put restricted testing needs to demostrate that the L plater has taken the chance to learn the ride skills to ride at or up to 70km/h. Put another way. If a traffic cop was following behind and pulled you over on your restricted test would you or wouldn't you be in breach of licence at 100km/h??--of course you would. So any testing officer advocating you doing so is advocating you breaking the law.
Ill go further and suggest that THEY by the responsibility laid on them to ensure you have learned sufficient to move to the next stage of licencing should penalised for doiung so.
Once they have a restricted licence THEN they have the chance to move to higher speeds and learn the extra skill required to deal with this. Notice I said LEARN.
Its about building on the skills you have developed.constant improvement over 12 months or so.

[marty]

Actually I'd like to start a new thread about the licencing laws.


dare you to

[FROSTY]

ACTUALLY-- I just called the cops to discuss this.
Just to clarify.
if a person WITH a learner licence exeeds 70km/h at ANY time they are breaking the law.
This is regardless of what they are doing at the time.
If they are failed their restricted licence when the ONLY grounds for doing so is for sticking to that 70km/h limit in a 80 or 100km/h zone then they have a case to present to the LTSA so that the TESTING OFFICER can be instructed as to what the law is.
The falure is on the part of the testing officer.
He or she should have a test route organised that allows you to ride at the speed you are legally allowed to
Indeed I'll go so far as to say they should have the officers decision reviewed and reversed.
The moment you have a restricted then 100km/h is all good.

That said--- again if pulled over whilst sitting their test the RIDER would be the one given a ticket even if instructed by a testing officer to exheed their personal speed limit.

[MSTRS]

ACTUALLY-- I just called the cops to discuss this.
Just to clarify.
if a person WITH a learner licence exeeds 70km/h at ANY time they are breaking the law.
This is regardless of what they are doing at the time.
If they are failed their restricted licence when the ONLY grounds for doing so is for sticking to that 70km/h limit in a 80 or 100km/h zone then they have a case to present to the LTSA so that the TESTING OFFICER can be instructed as to what the law is.


Hmmm. That's interesting. Did that exercise down these parts when the young fella was going through the system. We were told that the testing officer's instructions were to be followed, including exceeding 70kph. It was not a breach that would be prosecuted.
How do you respect a(ny) law when different cops tell you different things?

[FROSTY]

Hmmm. That's interesting. Did that exercise down these parts when the young fella was going through the system. We were told that the testing officer's instructions were to be followed, including exceeding 70kph. It was not a breach that would be prosecuted.
How do you respect a(ny) law when different cops tell you different things?
I went as high up the chain of command as I could without raising alarm.
It isn't a grey area it is indeed black and white.

[Neon]

LTSA claim that you are permitted to exceed the 70km/h limit during the restricted test (See link here near bottom of page) (http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/practical-tests/restricted-practical-riding-test.html)

"Part 3

This section is conducted in higher-speed areas of 70–100 km/h* and assesses your ability to safely and legally control your vehicle in these situations:

riding straight
riding straight on a multi-lane road or around a curve (left or right)
entering traffic flow or merging onto a motorway.
* Even though the conditions of your learner licence don’t allow you to ride at speeds above 70 km/h, you are permitted to do so during part 3 of this test."

[SMOKEU]

Well i am aren't I!? I'm paying the bloody ticket! This thread has developed beyond my ticket into a discussion of the actual law! No need to bloody well yell at me about being irrisponsible if i'm paying the bloody ticket!:oi-grr:

Don't pay the fine anytime soon. Wait for it to drag through the court system to screw the government around. They did it to you for no justifiable reason, so why not return the favour?

[MSTRS]

Don't pay the fine anytime soon. Wait for it to drag through the court system to screw the government around. They did it to you for no justifiable reason, so why not return the favour?

The law exists, so it's quite justifiable. Whether it's right/wrong is another matter altogether.
Marty, the post above spells it out...not everything is in the 'policeman's little black book' :oi-grr:

[SixPackBack]

Don't pay the fine anytime soon. Wait for it to drag through the court system to screw the government around. They did it to you for no justifiable reason, so why not return the favour?

Excellent advice, if every recipient of a minor traffic infringement followed this gem of civil disobedience the gubermints efforts at tax collection would come to a grinding halt. And rightly so.

[oldrider]

With stupid laws like this one and they wonder why people disrespect the law!

This should have been the first road law amended this time round but Nooooo! :brick: :argh:

They should make the author of that law ride a bike at 70kph from North Cape to the Bluff and back, as a reward for such safety concious thinking! :tugger:

[SMOKEU]

I don't see the point in paying traffic infringements when the cops don't even do their jobs properly. Like on Saturday night when the cops set up 4 road blocks and then went on their smoko break leaving over 100 cars stuck for over 2 hours. FTP

[avgas]

Foolish person. The law and safety have nothing to do with each other.
One wears the pants, the other wears their underpants over their pants

[avgas]

I don't see the point in paying traffic infringements when the cops don't even do their jobs properly. Like on Saturday night when the cops set up 4 road blocks and then went on their smoko break leaving over 100 cars stuck for over 2 hours. FTP
Errr - couldn't you just drive past........ thats what i would have done

[SMOKEU]

The police wouldn't let anyone move.

[imdying]

The police wouldn't let anyone move.But didn't you just post that they were on their smoko break?

[SMOKEU]

But didn't you just post that they were on their smoko break?

They set up 4 road blocks and then they were sitting in their cars and paddy wagons doing nothing. As soon as anyone tried to move their vehicle they would be told off. And if anyone got out of their vehicle they were told to get back in immediately.

[MSTRS]

Excellent advice, if every recipient of a minor traffic infringement followed this gem of civil disobedience the gubermints efforts at tax collection would come to a grinding halt. And rightly so.

Doubt it. Would just see the start of Night Court (Traffic prosecutions) presided over by JPs.
"Guilty. That'll be the original $80. Plus $130 costs. Oh...plus the after hours fee of $200. Pay as you leave. Next..."

[SixPackBack]

Doubt it. Would just see the start of Night Court (Traffic prosecutions) presided over by JPs.
"Guilty. That'll be the original $80. Plus $130 costs. Oh...plus the after hours fee of $200. Pay as you leave. Next..."

Not a chance our court system is in complete disarray. If it took them 28 months to process my simple speeding ticket, imagine the issues with increasing their work load by a factor of two. Rolling out another 'shift' would be almost impossible, the justice system pay crap and what rich lawyer or judge would do the grave yard shift?
Civil disobedience would work extremely well, the sheeple of Un Zud are the reason it never starts......Lard thick apathy!

[MSTRS]

Ah well...one of us is right. Just remember that when pollies (or political nazis) make decisions, those decisions seldom fix a problem. Rather, a whole new set are often created, usually on top of the old ones. A bit like Frosty suggests...

[nosebleed]

Bad luck. Was in the same situation today heading to do my restricted test but didnt get pulled over, thankfully. Appeal it, im sure someone will see the sense...

So that roughly translates as... I have no experience of what you're are talking about, as nothing like this has happened to me. Therefore I have no practical advice to offer.
But hi, and thanks for reading my first post.

[peasea]

Not a chance our court system is in complete disarray. If it took them 28 months to process my simple speeding ticket, imagine the issues with increasing their work load by a factor of two. Rolling out another 'shift' would be almost impossible, the justice system pay crap and what rich lawyer or judge would do the grave yard shift?
Civil disobedience would work extremely well, the sheeple of Un Zud are the reason it never starts......Lard thick apathy!


Couldn't agree more. Every ticket should be contested until they pull their collective heads in, especially 86kph in a 100kph zone just coz she's on an 'L' plate. 70 in a 100 is actually obstructive and very likely dangerous.

The person who issued the ticket isn't a cop, he's a revenue gathering pig. Cunts like that deserve the bash.

[peasea]

Well i am aren't I!? I'm paying the bloody ticket! This thread has developed beyond my ticket into a discussion of the actual law! No need to bloody well yell at me about being irrisponsible if i'm paying the bloody ticket!:oi-grr:

Plead 'not guilty', don't pay it unless you absolutely have to. Fight the ticket or that pig will be screwing everyone who runs above 70kph in a 100 zone.

[scumdog]

Plead 'not guilty', don't pay it unless you absolutely have to. Fight the ticket or that pig will be screwing everyone who runs above 70kph in a 100 zone.

The 'pig' won't give a fat rats arse regrdless of what she does.

He'll still dole out the tickets as he thinks fit.

He might also screw some but not 'everyone'.....:laugh::crazy:

[enigma51]

They set up 4 road blocks and then they were sitting in their cars and paddy wagons doing nothing. As soon as anyone tried to move their vehicle they would be told off. And if anyone got out of their vehicle they were told to get back in immediately.

Maybe there was reason for holding you up.

[enigma51]

Plead 'not guilty', don't pay it unless you absolutely have to. Fight the ticket or that pig will be screwing everyone who runs above 70kph in a 100 zone.

You do the crime you do the time

[TygerTung]

My friend didn't get a bike until he got his full.

He got his learners, waited six months without doing ANY road riding, borrowed a bike, did the test, then waited eighteen months without doing ANY road riding, then borrowed a bike, did his full, then got himself a VFR800.

What do you think about that? He had never had a bike licence in the past either.

[peasea]

You do the crime you do the time

Well, to a point, but there was a time when you could get beheaded or hung for pinching a loaf of bread. The law was changed......people still pinch bread these days but in most civilised you're less likely to lose your head over it.

My point is; dumb laws need some opposition/civil disobedience to get the attention of the law-makers.

[peasea]

The 'pig' won't give a fat rats arse regrdless of what she does.

He'll still dole out the tickets as he thinks fit.

He might also screw some but not 'everyone'.....:laugh::crazy:

That's the ticket.......rofl

PS: In my neck of the woods there is an 'a' in 'regardless'.

In your neck of the woods there should be three more 'r's.:whistle:

[MSTRS]

My friend didn't get a bike until he got his full.

He got his learners, waited six months without doing ANY road riding, borrowed a bike, did the test, then waited eighteen months without doing ANY road riding, then borrowed a bike, did his full, then got himself a VFR800.

What do you think about that? He had never had a bike licence in the past either.

I think your mate is an idiot.
OK - some people might be special. Or lucky. All bar a very small number would be a liability to themselves and others.

[imdying]

Maybe there was reason for holding you up.Yeah, letting people on Bealey Ave sleep instead of listening to boy wankers in their loser mobiles all night.

[Ms Piggy]

a ticket! Old mofo with nothing better to do i'm guessing! the only reason y i still got my L plate on is that i wanna sell my bike soon and need to have insurance incase i crash. I can't afford not to have insurance atm!

GET INSURANCE! It's only about $9 a month.

In relation to your fine - stink as! Write a reasonably worded letter and see if you can appeal to the powers that be.

*Hmmmm....didn't realise this thread was so old. Possibly my contribution has been repeated several times over.

[SMOKEU]

Maybe there was reason for holding you up.

They were just being cunts.

[MSTRS]

Shall we take the discussion about 70kph etc over here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=107269) ?

[chef]

i ride from welly to palmerston north use to commute from whity to welly all on a learners. never been done yet (touch wood) luck of the draw i gues

[Owl]

The problem is that a licence stage is there to allow you to practice. Whilst you are riding. If you are not allowed to practice the higher speed, then it is unfair to test you on it. Eh?

Thank you! I couldn't have answered that better!;)


Yep lets change the law so a rider with the lil slip of paper can go out on the motorways. Fantastic idea.
Doncha gettit??. If they are allowed to by law --they WILL

I wasn't aware that it was illegal to ride on the open road with a learner licence. Does the motorway have a minimum speed limit?


Answer this honestly dude. Would you be happy for your partner to tackle rushhour traffic at night in the rain ??

Not at this stage and not for quite some time!:no:


Now to answer your question -
I'm gobsmacked that a testing officer would advocate a rider riding at a speed they have NEVER been able to legally ride at. Quite simply put restricted testing needs to demostrate that the L plater has taken the chance to learn the ride skills to ride at or up to 70km/h. Put another way. If a traffic cop was following behind and pulled you over on your restricted test would you or wouldn't you be in breach of licence at 100km/h??--of course you would. So any testing officer advocating you doing so is advocating you breaking the law.
Ill go further and suggest that THEY by the responsibility laid on them to ensure you have learned sufficient to move to the next stage of licencing should penalised for doiung so.
Once they have a restricted licence THEN they have the chance to move to higher speeds and learn the extra skill required to deal with this. Notice I said LEARN.
Its about building on the skills you have developed.constant improvement over 12 months or so.

Like it or not, that's the reality. Do we tell the testing officer "Get fucked", I think not, so we do as we're told and take our chances.

Perhaps possible that she could've received an infringement notice during her test, but in all honesty, what cop would do that? What cop could possibly be that stupid and let me assure you, she'd gladly accept that ticket!:yes:

Make a good thread too!:laugh:

[kunoichi]

I'm baffled by the restricted tester saying you could breech license condition and go 100km for (supposedly) the first time! Tho i do see the point that you should test somebody is able to control themselves at that speed before giving them the legal right to do so. But if my testing officer tells me to do that, i will tell him that if we get pulled over by the cop he must take the fall. I was going by his instruction to pass my test, and he as a testing officer gave me the permission to do so. I simply won't pay for a ticket if i get pulled over during my test! that's bull shit!!

[FROSTY]

Put simply responsibility rests firmly on the shoulders of the RIDER.
NOT the testing officer. I've had that confirmed by the cops.

[enigma51]

They were just being cunts.

You right but they where being cunts to you and thats must have made there day

[kunoichi]

Well then if i fail because i didn't follow the instructions of my test officer, that will cost me, and if i get pulled over that will cost me too! There is no justice in that!

[enigma51]

Well then if i fail because i didn't follow the instructions of my test officer, that will cost me, and if i get pulled over that will cost me too! There is no justice in that!

No one is arguing with that statement.

[R.B.S]

Writing an appeal will more than likely delay the process and u will still get lumped with the fine, unless the officer did not have a fluro safety vest on at the time. That will be the only slim chance you could have to get off that one.

[kunoichi]

No one is arguing with that statement.

Well then surely the cops can't argue with it either and therefore shouldn't fine me due to the apparent injustice of it all!:argh:

[Owl]

I finally found it! It's ok to do 100kph during part 3 of your restricted test.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/practical-tests/restricted-practical-riding-test.html

[kunoichi]

Sweet. So then technically, the cops can't pull me over as i am sitting this section of the test! Cheers! :hug:

[Neon]

LTSA claim that you are permitted to exceed the 70km/h limit during the restricted test (See link here near bottom of page) (http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/practical-tests/restricted-practical-riding-test.html)

"Part 3

This section is conducted in higher-speed areas of 70–100 km/h* and assesses your ability to safely and legally control your vehicle in these situations:

riding straight
riding straight on a multi-lane road or around a curve (left or right)
entering traffic flow or merging onto a motorway.
* Even though the conditions of your learner licence don’t allow you to ride at speeds above 70 km/h, you are permitted to do so during part 3 of this test."


I finally found it! It's ok to do 100kph during part 3 of your restricted test.

http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/roadcode/motorcycle-road-code/practical-tests/restricted-practical-riding-test.html

... ;)

10char

[enigma51]

Sweet. So then technically, the cops can't pull me over as i am sitting this section of the test! Cheers! :hug:

Good luck in proving that one. You are talking about the cops.

[kunoichi]

good luck in proving that i was sitting the 3rd part of my practical restricted test? i always have the paperwork on me saying the date and time i'm due to sit my restricted, so even if the mofo doesn't pull up with me and the cop and just drove off, i'v got written evidence of what i was doing, and have the name of the tester so they can hit the AA up about anything like that!

[enigma51]

good luck in proving that i was sitting the 3rd part of my practical restricted test? i always have the paperwork on me saying the date and time i'm due to sit my restricted, so even if the mofo doesn't pull up with me and the cop and just drove off, i'v got written evidence of what i was doing, and have the name of the tester so they can hit the AA up about anything like that!

No need to try and convince me its the coppers and court system you will have to persuade if you get to actually stand in front of one. Remember if the copper doesnt show up they move the date if you dont show up your guilty you pay the fine

[Neon]

This thread is getting boring.

Look, you knew the conditions of your license, you broke them, you got caught. Pay the fine (assuming you get one) and chalk one up to experience.

Court is an expensive place to argue the merits or otherwise of NZ statutes. If you really believe in the cause, get lobbying.

[Patrick]

12 pages for a non existent ticket...

PM sent.

Get your restricted. You've had a 6L for a year..... :crazy:

Sorted. :woohoo:

If ticket arrives, show the 6R and ask for the ticket to be waived etc etc, as explained in the PM.... :2thumbsup

[gatch]

this thread has gone on too long

tits out for the boys !

[TygerTung]

I think your mate is an idiot.
OK - some people might be special. Or lucky. All bar a very small number would be a liability to themselves and others.

Nah he used to race a lot of Motorcross. YZ250's and stuff so he knows how to control a bike. He was pretty good too it seems. Every year we have a motorcross competition at work, the engine centre vs the hanger and he hadn't ridden a dirt bike for a year, jumped on his brothers YZF250 and he was right up the front, so that was pretty good.

Anyway the point is, you can potentially get your full bike licence without doing more than 40 kilometres on the road.

[kunoichi]

this thread has gone on too long

tits out for the boys !

LOL! i suspect other girls on kb won't like me so much for that! :girlfight:

[gatch]

Right now, they don't exist ;)

[MSTRS]

I'm baffled by the restricted tester saying you could breech license condition and go 100km for (supposedly) the first time! Tho i do see the point that you should test somebody is able to control themselves at that speed before giving them the legal right to do so.

The problem with this is that to gain a 6L, all you have to do is prove a modicum of bike control in a carpark at walking speed and pass a road rules scratchy. You are then allowed to join the traffic at up to 70kph. Where was the test that you could handle that?

[sinned]

This thread is getting boring.

Sure is


12 pages for a non existent ticket...

This is KB


this thread has gone on too long

It is posted in "General Bike Ravings" - note to myself: get a life and don't read anything posted in General Bike Ravings or Rant and Rave.

[Tony]

I doubt it. The law may be an ass but it's still the law and you broke it.

I agree but if you are doing 70km/h on the motorway you are actually breaking a more severe law than the second tier learner restriction rule.

Possibly your ticket was issued by "Rules are Rules" Officer Richard Armstrong?

The New Zealand Police have become victims of a phenomenom called M.T.P. (Mindless technical Policing). Most of the police I know have become frustrated and demoralised with their jobs. They no longer see that their policing activities have much effect on safety. As a consequence many of them are now carrying out MTP with little or no regard to traffic safety. Many of the traffic officers no longer bother to keep current with traffic safety research and issues - they have basically become so frustrated with the buracracy that hinders their jobs and a court system that can no longer function.

The biggest problem with M.T.P. is that this type of policing loses police the support and respect of the public for the police and the law.

Rule 7 of the 1998 Transport Cct states "(2) A person may not drive a motor vehicle, or cause a motor vehicle to be driven, at a speed or in a manner which, having regard to all the circumstances, is or might be dangerous to the public or to a person." (ref: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1998/0110/latest/DLM433613.html)

Diving a motorcycle at 70km/h is clearly in breach of this law.

The ex Minister of Transport Harry Dynhoven clearly stated on the record that it is dangerous tor drive at 70km/h on the motorway and has cited research to back this up. "This restriction is largely ignored. When this speed restriction is adhered to it creates a large difference in the speed of vehicles travelling on the open road. Which is a known safety problem." This speed discrepancy safety issue is also covered in the "Down with Speed" published by the ACC which has become a cornerstone document in the fromulation of LTSA and Ministry of Transports policy directions.

In theory traffic cops should be issuing tickets to all motorcyclists travelling at the dangerous speed of 70km/h for dangerous driving.

The ACC claims "ACC is the lead agency for mortorcycle safety in New Zealand".

The ACC has published safey advice for motorcyclists that includes much good safety advice including. "Move with the traffic as much as you can". This is admittedly open to interpretation but I think you know what they meant.

The LTSA, ACC and the Ministry of Transport have all refered to research conducted by Monash University which states "Until 1987 Victoria had a requirement that drivers could not exceed 80km/h in the first year of licensing. After this restriction was removed, an analysis showed no evidence of an increase in serious crashes" they went on to say "restricting young drivers from high-speed roads was associated with a 5 percent increase in their crash inbolvement" (ref http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/muarc240.pdf)

The Government published a Regulatory Impact Statement on the recommendation to remove the 70Km/h limit on safety grounds. This document has been endorsed by the Natrional Road Safety Committee, Ministry of Transport, Land Transport New Zealand, the Accident Compensation Corportation, the Ministry of Justiceand the New Zealand Police. (ref http://www.transport.govt.nz/about/functions/Documents/Motorcycle-Safety-RIS.pdf)

The road code advises that when merging on to a motorway "change your speed to match the speed of the motorway traffic" for obvious safety reasons. In effect if the traffic is doing 100km/h the road code directs you to match speed with that traffic flow.

Some would argue that the learner restrictions take precedence over the 1998 New Zealand Transport Act but this is not the case. The Learner restrictions are encompased as "Land Transprot Rules". Regulatios and Rules are the key second-tier legislation governing land transport registration, licensing and compliance systems. (ref http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/legislation/acts-regulations.html.)

If any one would like any further references or source information please let me know. I am happy to assist in the defense of any case around this matter -provided you wern't travelling faster than a 100km/h in which case you do deserve a ticket.

[pzkpfw]

Diving a motorcycle at 70km/h is clearly in breach of this law.

What if you're doing it in a 70 km/hr zone?



The ex Minister of Transport Harry Dynhoven clearly stated on the record that it is dangerous tor drive at 70km/h on the motorway and has cited research to back this up. "This restriction is largely ignored. When this speed restriction is adhered to it creates a large difference in the speed of vehicles travelling on the open road. Which is a known safety problem."

I don't think anybody in this thread would argue against this.

But the point then becomes why the rider is on a road with a limit over 70 km/hr.



In theory traffic cops should be issuing tickets to all motorcyclists travelling at the dangerous speed of 70km/h for dangerous driving.

Depends where they are doing it, doesn't it?



The ACC has published safey advice for motorcyclists that includes much good safety advice including. "Move with the traffic as much as you can". This is admittedly open to interpretation but I think you know what they meant.

So stay out of 100 km/hr zones when you are restricted to 70 km/hr.



The road code advises that when merging on to a motorway "change your speed to match the speed of the motorway traffic" for obvious safety reasons. In effect if the traffic is doing 100km/h the road code directs you to match speed with that traffic flow.

So stay out of 100 km/hr zones when you are restricted to 70 km/hr.

[Mom]

Diving a motorcycle at 70km/h is clearly in breach of this law.

Diving a motorcycle is risky at any speed :pinch:

[mowgli]

I agree but if you are doing 70km/h on the motorway you are actually breaking a more severe law than the second tier learner restriction rule.

Rule 7 of the 1998 Transport Cct states "(2) A person may not drive a motor vehicle, or cause a motor vehicle to be driven, at a speed or in a manner which, having regard to all the circumstances, is or might be dangerous to the public or to a person." (ref: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1998/0110/latest/DLM433613.html)

Diving a motorcycle at 70km/h is clearly in breach of this law.
Nice post but you've got your references wrong. A learner isn't riding dangerously (in terms of the Act) doing 70kph any more than a truck is driving dangerously when crawling up an incline. Both are travelling at less than the posted limit and both may be holding up other traffic.

They may be in breach of the Act s37 (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1998/0110/latest/DLM434658.html#DLM434658) if they "...operate a vehicle on a road carelessly or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road." In other words if they fail to pull over when it is safe to do so to let others past.

Your comments around Mindless Technical Policing are spot on IMHO.

[caseye]

...Diving a motorcycle at 70km/h is clearly in breach of this law...


Diving a motorcycle is risky at any speed :pinch:

LOL yep other motorists seeing a frogman on a motorcycle just wouldn't know what was about to happen next I reckon.Definitely UNSAFE.

[Tony]

So stay out of 100 km/hr zones when you are restricted to 70 km/hr.

At first glance your suggestion makes apparent self evident sense. However the Monash University study makes several points regarding this.

"Doherty and Andrey (1997, cited in Senserrick & Whelan,2003) found that restricting young drivers from high-speed roads was associated with a 5 percent increase in their crash involvement. They attributed this finding to the restriction forcing young drivers off the highest standard roads onto lower standard, less safe, roads."

Most 100km/h roads have fewer intersections and driveways and less man made obstacles to negotiate and observe - roundabouts, traffic islands, traffic lights, moms dropping kids off to school, etc. On many 100km/h roads that are motorways or expressways traffic travelling in oposite directions is divided by a central barrier (hopefully not a cheesecutter). It may be that these factors contribute to making 100km/h zones the safest zones for novice riders.

New Zealand road 'safety' rules are based on unresearched premises and hunches and the opinions of uninformed people like us and them. The reality is that our road 'safety' rules are not based on research and if we did try to base them on research as we should we would actually need to start doing some real research.

Stephen Joyce has no budget for this so he asks for submissions from us and them and we don't know and neither do them. (We just think we do and so do them).

[vgcspares]

I am happy to assist in the defense of any case around this matter -provided you wern't travelling faster than a 100km/h in which case you do deserve a ticket.

beg to differ - riding slightly faster than the prevailing traffic is a necessary safety device for morcyclists as we can then wholly focus on what's in front

to that end I ride to the prevailing speed PLUS 10 whatever the legal speed limit is

[MSTRS]

beg to differ - riding slightly faster than the prevailing traffic is a necessary safety device for morcyclists as we can then wholly focus on what's in front

to that end I ride to the prevailing speed PLUS 10 whatever the legal speed limit is

Which makes you stand out. To Mr HP. Plus, one would assume that you are passing everything in sight, which means that you are taking an increased number of risks (as there is risk associated with a passing manouevre). I can totally understand why you would think you are safer...but I also think that all you are doing is swapping one sort of danger for another.

[Ixion]

beg to differ - riding slightly faster than the prevailing traffic is a necessary safety device for morcyclists as we can then wholly focus on what's in front

to that end I ride to the prevailing speed PLUS 10 whatever the legal speed limit is


I also like to keep clear of traffic. I like a little clear box around me, free of idiots.

However I use a slightly different formula. Prevailing speed + 10 unless that would involve too much plod-risk. In which case, prevailing speed MINUS 10 , and let the idiots go on ahead.

Sometime though you have a whole bunch of idiots at various speeds. In which case neither plus or minus will work. So then you have to assess the risk of a few seconds at DECENT speed to get clear of the fast idiots.

[sleemanj]

beg to differ - riding slightly faster than the prevailing traffic is a necessary safety device for morcyclists


There should be no need (except amusement or splitting) for extended travel at above the prevailing speed of traffic.

Just open up a space and do what you need to keep it open, but you don't need to keep pushing through the traffic flow.

You should be doing this no matter if you're on a bike or in a car, properly spaced traffic is not only safer it is much more efficient and has a very noticable affect on traffic flows.


as we can then wholly focus on what's in front

You should very much always be aware of what's going on behind you! "Wholly focussing" your attention ahead isn't a good idea. Adopt a state of constant awareness of everything around you.

[vgcspares]

we've all ridden for many years and have our own formulae - mine hasn't killed me yet, nor broken any bones, nor attracted more than an acceptable level of interest from the cops on three continents (US, UK and here) so each to his own I guess

[scumdog]

beg to differ - riding slightly faster than the prevailing traffic is a necessary safety device for morcyclists as we can then wholly focus on what's in front

to that end I ride to the prevailing speed PLUS 10 whatever the legal speed limit is

Sooooo, lemme see, when the rest of the traffic is doing 100 to 105 kph YOU are doing bursts of 135+kph then back down to 115 or so - and zipping in and out of the 'slower' vehicles as you pass them??:crazy:

Nice troll.:woohoo:

[vgcspares]

the answer will depend on what you do for a living