Bike cop learns me of bus lane law...

[Bulldog]

Last Thursday I had a bike cop follow me from Pt chev to almost Newton off ramp before pulling me over to inform me my rego had expired which I explained I was on my way to fix (I was!).

Anyway the interesting part of this boring story is that he informed me that it was now legal for bikers to use the bus lane! I asked since when? in which he replied for approx 3-4 months now. He said if you have any issues keep his number at the bottom of the ticket for confirmation!

I don't know if there is any confirmation of this law change anywhere but I know I'll now use the bus lane without watching for cops now :P

[Tickler]

So this is for using the bus lane on the motorway? or a bus lane leading to the motorway? Different areas are controlled by different government bodies. (Motorway = transit nz, road = local council) either way its a bonus for bikers as now you dont have to feel bad/watch out for cops.

p.s you should be able to get off your no rego fine if you send in proof that you got your rego soon after and write a letter saying "i was shocked that my rego had expired, i had no idea!"

All the best and cheers for the new info!

[FROSTY]

Do a search under bus lanes dude---theres plenty of info on it

[Patrick]

p.s you should be able to get off your no rego fine if you send in proof that you got your rego soon after and write a letter saying "i was shocked that my rego had expired, i had no idea!"

All the best and cheers for the new info!

Coughed to knowing and was going to get it... if it is over a month overdue, may not get off, but there are 200 reasons for giving it a go and asking the Q, especially if you pulled finger and actually got it done that day....

[McJim]

There was a thread on this last year where it was a big nono to use the bus lane on the motorway but okay to use the ones in town.

I too am interested to know if this is a legislation change or just a local Auckland change for specific bus lanes.

[Karma]

Who cares if it's legal or not... you seen the amount of shit in those bus lanes? You may avoid the traffic, but factor in spending extra cash on all the punctures you'll pick up.

[Jantar]

Its been legal to ride in ALL bus lanes ever since the law was changed in 2004. Unfortunately its taken this long for it to get through.

[breakaway]

Using bus lanes

Bus lane. Research shows us that if bus lanes are for buses and bikes, and cars use regular traffic lanes, all will get where they want to go faster.

Bus lanes in Auckland City are clearly marked with roadside signage. This usually states: BUS LANE, and then outlines the hours the bus lane is operating.

New national road transport user rules mean bus lanes do not necessarily have to be signposted as clearways. Wherever you see a BUS LANE sign, make sure you check the signage and ensure you know what times it operates.

When bus lanes are operating, motorists are not able to use these lanes, and risk being towed and a $150 fine.

Auckland City will be applying the regional standards for bus lane colouring. This generally means a section at the beginning and end of each bus lane will be coloured green (and sometimes intermediate sections as well), to help motorists recognise the bus lanes.

While bus lanes generally operate citybound during the morning traffic peak and outbound during the afternoon traffic peak, operation times do differ within the city, so it's important that you read the bus lane signage.

Key facts about using bus lanes:


Bikes use bus lanes too! Buses, cycles and motorcycles are all authorised users of bus lanes, so keep an eye out for them. Auckland City and Manukau City Council are currently running a bus lane education campaign: click here for more information.

If you are turning, merging or accessing a driveway when a bus lane is operating, you can use the bus lane for up to 50 metres.

Auckland City enforces the correct use of bus lanes. If you drive in a bus lane when it's operating, for any reason other then needing to turn within 50 metres, you risk a $150 fine.

Driving, parking or stopping on the lanes is prohibited during the times they operate. If you are parked or stopped on a lane at the wrong time, you will be given a parking ticket.

You can drive in bus priority lanes outside of their operational times

Auckland City bus priority lanes can be used by the following vehicles only:

buses. (A bus is defined in the new Land Transport Rule as a passenger service vehicle with 10 or more seats, including the driver's seat. This excludes tourist and shuttle buses)

cycles
motorcycles, motor scooters, mopeds

Bus lanes on motorways operate differently than local road bus lanes in that motorcycles and cycles cannot use them.
Taxis (cars or shuttles with nine seats or less) may not use the bus priority lanes.
If you receive a $150 fine for driving illegally in a bus lane, you can pay your fine online.


Learn the rules and you'll get where you need to go faster! Bus lanes work best when everyone keeps to the lanes they should be in.

http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/auckland/transport/buses/lanes.asp

[sAsLEX]

(Motorway = transit nz, road = local council)

Wrong the law passed in 2004 was meant to make the law the same all through the country and remove different coucils having different rules etc.

[lti]

Wrong the law passed in 2004 was meant to make the law the same all through the country and remove different coucils having different rules etc.

Bus lanes on roads = sweet

Bus lanes on Mways = no. (they're not even proper bus lanes)

Bus lanes on onramps = ?

[Cr1MiNaL]

If u dont know(?) = NO. :nono:

[sAsLEX]

Bus lanes on roads = sweet

Bus lanes on Mways = no. (theyre not even proper bus lanes)

Bus lanes on onramps = ?

Why are they signed the same as any other bus lane then?

Why do they not specifically exclude motorcycles as required by law?

How is a layman meant to interpret the law when those that make it cant follow it themselves?

Why does all beer in the UK taste terrible?

[craigs288]

Why are they signed the same as any other bus lane then?

Why do they not specifically exclude motorcycles as required by law?

How is a layman meant to interpret the law when those that make it cant follow it themselves?



I only noticed yesterday morning on the way to work, between Pt Chev lights and the Western Springs onramp, the signs next to the bus lane now have 3 pictures, a bus, a MOTORCYCLE and a bicycle. The lane itself still only has a bus and bicycle painted on it but at least there are now signs with a motorcycle on it. ( I am assuming they are also on other bus lanes around the city).
I'm not convinced you will see a motorcycle on the motoway signs

[sAsLEX]

I'm not convinced you will see a motorcycle on the motoway signs

you wont see one that says " No Motorcycles" or any other "Specific Exclusion" either which means to the letter of the law we are allowed on them, if they are a bus lane which they sign them as, but say they are not, but are emergency stopping lanes they let scheduled buses on, but they are not bus lanes........

[ambler]

Over here I got done for riding in a bus lane - because my engine was 250cc, but for the hordes of smaller bikes travelling with me it was ok !?!
Some laws are so stupid, I don't even ask anymore...

[Swoop]

Bulldog. Can you phone the copper and ask for more information on this?

If the rule has changed recently, details would be wonderful!

There has been a lot of talk on KB regarding the motorway lanes, and if this officer could clarify, at the least it would certainly give us an idea of how the police are looking at the issue.

[Kwaka14]

Bikes are "specifically" excluded from Motorway bus lanes, the Sign states "Buses Only".... everything other than buses "specifically" is excluded... Sux eh

[Swoop]

Bikes are "specifically" excluded from Motorway bus lanes, the Sign states "Buses Only".... everything other than buses "specifically" is excluded... Sux eh
Here we go again...
No we are not "specifically excluded" since there isn't a sign saying "No motorcycles".
An example of "specific exclusion" is the sign at the entrance of each motorway, which has a graphic of a person walking, with a circle around it and a bar across it... = NO pedestrians... = specific exclusion.

[Sanx]

A sign that reads "Buses Only" - a specific inclusion - by definition implies all other vehicles are excluded. If it were otherwise, then the pole would be festooned with round signs with little pictograms of different vehicle types with lines through them. No pedestrians, no bicycles, no tractors, no electric golf carts, no horses, no people dressed as clowns riding unicycles whilst juggling flaming clubs. That sort of thing.

However, there are some motorway bus lanes that are (or at least were a few months back) incorrectly signed. There was no specific inclusion or explicit exclusion and although Transit's intention was to prohibit use by motorcycles, the incorrect signs meant that any Police tickets wouldn't stick. It wasn't a Police failure - it was purely procedural.

[Jantar]

A sign that reads "Buses Only" - a specific inclusion...
No, The court has already ruled that "Buses Only" simply defines it as a bus lane. Motorcycles are not specified, and therefore are not specifically excluded. In order for motorcycles to be specifically excluded then they must be specified.

[BevanPT]

you wont see one that says " No Motorcycles" or any other "Specific Exclusion" either which means to the letter of the law we are allowed on them, if they are a bus lane which they sign them as, but say they are not, but are emergency stopping lanes they let scheduled buses on, but they are not bus lanes........

The signs on Motorway bus lanes read "Buses Only" which in itself excludes all other vehicles and is correct under the transport regulations. As for any change in using these lanes, looks like some research is required.

[sAsLEX]

Bikes are "specifically" excluded from Motorway bus lanes, the Sign states "Buses Only".... everything other than buses "specifically" is excluded... Sux eh


The signs on Motorway bus lanes read "Buses Only" which in itself excludes all other vehicles and is correct under the transport regulations. As for any change in using these lanes, looks like some research is required.

Both of you seem to have read the regulations quite carefully I see........ note dripping sarcasm there.


As a few have pointed out it must be a specific exclusion as other wise bus lanes are open to bikes. All the buses only sign does it help identify it as a bus lane to cagers.

[Biff]

Why does all beer in the UK taste terrible?

Arse biscuits.

1. Spitfire.
2. Brains S.A
3. London Pride

The top three best tasting beers in the world IMO. And all from the UK. None of that imported fizzy European shite.

Now I've got to infract my arse for going off topic. Thanks dude.

[Toaster]

So, according to the council website.... yes to town bus lanes, no to motorway bus lanes.

[twinkle]

I had to check my dictionary... but jantar saslex and swoop are right I think. Maybe someone has already tested this in court and that was why the copper said that?:confused:

[McJim]

Guess to be on the safe side I'd best keep using the motorcycle lanes on the motorway then, y'know the one between lanes 1 & 2 and the one between lanes 2 & 3 :rofl:

And the reason beer tastes so bad there is that they sell Steinlager in the UK now!:Pokey:

Go north young man and get a pint of Younger's Number 3 ale doon yer throat.

[Swoop]

Guess to be on the safe side I'd best keep using the motorcycle lanes on the motorway then, y'know the one between lanes 1 & 2 and the one between lanes 2 & 3 :rofl:
"1A" and "2A":whistle:

And the reason beer tastes so bad there is that they sell Steinlager in the UK now!
Now???
They sold it back in '88 when I was there.
Vile stuff.

"They're drinking our beer here" was the marketing slogan. "Thank f*ck for that - it means less of the shite in NZ!":yes: was my slogan.

[Bulldog]

Well as far as I'm concerned I'll be keeping his details on me and stating his name should I ever get pulled. I'll be damned if I'm not using the bus lanes. I've always used them anyway as it's much safer than filtering and probably much safer than sitting in the traffic.

FOr the occasional fine (should they get away with one) I'm happy to keep using them. :whocares:

[sAsLEX]

Now I've got to infract my arse for going off topic. Thanks dude.

Yeah better be careful what I type these days might end up in the sin bin for adding a bit of colour to a post that someone then takes as a serious question.....

We all know it tastes average as they drink it warm....

[Kwaka14]

Both of you seem to have read the regulations quite carefully I see........ note dripping sarcasm there.


As a few have pointed out it must be a specific exclusion as other wise bus lanes are open to bikes. All the buses only sign does it help identify it as a bus lane to cagers.

I pulled this off the herald, I am possibly wrong but the article below is what I based my reply on....

Get moving: Bus access, safety mean no end to rush-hour hassle
5:00AM Tuesday May 01, 2007
By Phoebe Falconer

I live on Sylvan Ave in Northcote. There is often a morning rush-hour queue of 10 to 15 minutes to get through the traffic lights at the intersection of Sylvan and Onewa Rd. Will the roadworks that are being completed on the motorway and the Onewa offramp improve the Sylvan Ave traffic situation? Andrew Bruce, Northcote.
Not really. The Onewa Rd interchange upgrade is not designed to provide any greater level of private car access to the motorway southbound during peak hours. It will, however, improve the capacity on Onewa Rd and the Onewa-Sylvan intersection during off-peak hours. Isn't that helpful?
The two main purposes of the upgrade are safety and improved bus access. Safety is enhanced by separating the southbound on- and offramps, and providing greater clearance under the new bridges for motorway traffic. The Northern Busway will be extended past the Onewa interchange towards the Harbour Bridge, so buses will get an easier run. It's all designed, of course, to get us out of our cars and into public transport.
I ride a motorcycle to work in the city every day from Henderson. I am told by friends that I am allowed to ride in the bus lanes in Auckland and Waitakere cities. I assume that includes the motorways. Is this correct? Steve King, Henderson.
No. While your friends are right, and you can ride your motorbike in city bus lanes, the motorway bus lanes are just that - for buses only.
With the western rail line double-tracking, is there any intention of realigning Titirangi Rd? There is a real bottleneck under the railway overbridge as traffic tries to go from two lanes to one. John Reynolds, Glen Eden.
The second line is going to go on existing bridge piers, so there is no chance the road will be widened just yet. A road-widening plan is to be designed but will not be used until there are new bridge piers. There is no timeframe for this.
And a clarification for last week's column: The extra lane at Tristram Ave needs to wait for the Northern Busway to be operational. It has not been delayed by funding issues. The bridge at Tristram Ave means there is no spare room for the roadworks to take place while the buses are using the temporary bus lane. The Tristram Ave section will go ahead as soon as the busway is operational early next year.

[The Pastor]

The sgin may not exclude motorbikes, or cars or anything. But the intention of the sgin is to exclude everything that isnt a bus.

There fore you will get pulled over by the cops for riding in a buss lane, and thats all that matters. Also you may find cars will follow you for riding in a buss lane (its happend to me!).

You might be able to get off the charge in court, but whats the point? Transit don't want you there and you have to take days off work to get off the charge, and that will cost you more than paying the fine, OR just riding in the lanes like everyone else.

[sAsLEX]

The sgin may not exclude motorbikes, or cars or anything. But the intention of the sgin is to exclude everything that isnt a bus.

There fore you will get pulled over by the cops for riding in a buss lane, and thats all that matters. Also you may find cars will follow you for riding in a buss lane (its happend to me!).

You might be able to get off the charge in court, but whats the point? Transit don't want you there and you have to take days off work to get off the charge, and that will cost you more than paying the fine, OR just riding in the lanes like everyone else.

oh they "intend" to follow the law, a classic defence.

How many bus lanes are in question here? Not too many, if they have an issue spend the few hundred and put up specific exclusion signs.

[peasea]

There was a thread on this last year where it was a big nono to use the bus lane on the motorway but okay to use the ones in town.

I too am interested to know if this is a legislation change or just a local Auckland change for specific bus lanes.


All of the above, can do it in the burbs (local council bylaws) can't do it on the m/way (transit) bloody confusing, got done for it myself, went to court, lost, more cash for the coffers.

[Max Preload]

No, The court has already ruled that "Buses Only" simply defines it as a bus lane. Motorcycles are not specified, and therefore are not specifically excluded. In order for motorcycles to be specifically excluded then they must be specified.

Can you quote a case? I'd be interested in knowing this if I stop, ummm, I mean get stopped.

[Jantar]

Can you quote a case? I'd be interested in knowing this if I stop, ummm, I mean get stopped.
No, I can't quote directly, but it was reported in one of the Northern papers earlier this year. It is also one of the reasons (maybe the main reason) that the police were told to stop issuing tickets to motorcyclists using the bus lanes on the motorway.

The whole point is that the Transit bylaw predated the legislation passed by parliament, and that rules and regulations passed by parliament take precedent over bylaws anyway. Transit still have the option of banning motorcycles from motorway bus lanes, but only if they erect specific signage.

[swbarnett]

I was sighted by a cop using the bus lane on the Esmonde Rd on ramp (before the new ramp was open but in the middle of the work). I got a letter accusing me of "driving in an unavailable lane". I sent them a letter back stating that it was unclear where the Esmonde Rd bus lane finished and the motorway bus lane started. They replied that:


There is a discrepancy in the law as motorcycles are allowed to use "bus lanes" unless stated "bus lane only". But you are not allowed to use "bus lanes" on the motorway.

There was a sign at the start of the on ramp but because it only said "bus lane begins" the charge was dropped.

So, my conclusions are these:

1. You may use council bus lanes throughout Auckland (already understood I think).
2. You may use on ramp bus lanes unless the word "only" appears on the sign.
3. The "only" restriction probably also applies to suburban bus lanes if it appears on the sign (as it does in Wellesley St. just east of Queen St. in Auckland)
4. You are not allowed to use the bus lanes actually on the motorway.

[Jabez]

This morning I was pulled over for riding in the City bound north-western motorway bus lane.

I said to the officer that there was no sign "specifically excluding motorcycles" as required by "Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004". He never mentioned the "Buses only" sign!

He asked me for my licence, which I proceeded to get out from my bag.
Conveniently I was carrying a copy of the above rule, which I showed the officer.
He asked if I wanted to argue this to a judge & I said yes!
He informed me that the Transit NZ bylaw has precedence over the "Law of the land"!!!

He asked me if I was a lawyer........

I said no & he effectively said don't tell him how to do his job!!

He then reiterated that I couldn't use the bus lane & asked if I would I like that in writing (ticket), I said no & so he got back in his car & waited for me to leave.



Now if it is indeed illegal to use the motorway bus lane & he wasn't just trying to scare me, he should have given me a ticketed!

Anyway I'm always up for a challenge, so I decided to do some investigation of my own.

BTW, I am not a lawyer, so the conclusions that I come to are my own opinion.

1, Check out his claim about "bylaws".
(As you will see I tend to like getting things from source, not hearsay!)

The "Bylaws act 1920” from Statutes of NZ:
14 Bylaw not invalid because subject-matter dealt with by statute

No bylaw shall be invalid merely because it deals with a matter already dealt with by the laws of New Zealand, unless it is repugnant to the provisions of those laws.


17 Part of bylaw only may be deemed invalid

If any bylaw contains any provisions which are invalid because they are ultra vires of the local authority, or repugnant to the laws of New Zealand, or unreasonable, or for any other cause whatever, the bylaw shall be invalid to the extent of those provisions and any others which cannot be severed therefrom.


Can't claim Ultra vires
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/browse_vw.asp?content-set=pal_regs&clientid=1617432301&viewtype=contents
They have the authority!

But Repugnant may be a go'er:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/repugnant
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=repugnant


2, Ok, what does the bylaw actually say?

August 2002 bylaw:
http://www.dia.govt.nz/Pubforms.nsf/NZGZT/NZGazette90August02.pdf/$file/NZGazette90August02.pdf
Amendment August 2005 (note after 2004 rule):
http://www.dia.govt.nz/Pubforms.nsf/NZGZT/NZGazette123Aug05.pdf/$file/NZGazette123Aug05.pdf

Ok, no where in this Gazette dose it even mention motorcycles, but note this statement at the end!

"Any reference in this bylaw to any statute or regulation is deemed to include all amendments and revisions made from time to time to that statute or regulation."


3, The motorway bus lane is legally marked as a bus lane, therefore...
"Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004"
bus lane means a lane reserved by a marking or sign installed at the start of the lane and at each point at which the lane resumes after an intersection for the use of—
(a)buses; and
[(b)cycles, mopeds, and motorcycles (unless one or more are specifically excluded by the sign)]

So I am legally able to use the motorway bus lane unless it has the symbol of a motorcycle inside a red circle with a diagonal line through it (just like the no cyclist & pedestrian signs at all motorway on ramps) which would specifically exclude motorcycles.



References:
Bylaw regulations:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/browse_vw.asp?content-set=pal_statutes

Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/browse_vw.asp?content-set=pal_regs&clientid=1617432301&viewtype=contents

Ultra vires
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/browse_vw.asp?content-set=pal_regs&clientid=1617432301&viewtype=contents

Repugnant:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/repugnant

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=repugnant

[Max Preload]

Fucking excellent work! Muchos bling for you! :yes:

I'm going to ride down the motorway bus lanes intentionally from now on, just to bait the pigs, carrying a printout of the relevant legislation and dare them to ticket me. I don't even care if it's the wrong conclusion. I'll happily to test it in court myself, just on principle. Screw their "policy" if it doesn't stack up.

[Max Preload]

Just a couple of minor corrections.

It's the "Bylaw Act 1910" not 1920...

The links don't work because of stupid frames. But here are PDF's of the pages.

[Sanx]

Excellent work, Jabez. I think the argument would come down to what constitutes a 'specific exclusion'. To me, a sign that says 'Buses only' - in effect, a specific inclusion, could logically be taken as an exclusion of all other vehicle types. However, the phrase 'specifically excluded' could be taken to mean that Transit NZ would have to put up a 'No motorcyles' sign, as you surmised.

The final decision, of course, would come down to a magistrate, and we all know how clued up magistrates are when it comes to legal matters. I suspect that if this formed the basis of your argument in court, the Police prosecutor would have little trouble convincing the magistrate that the 'Buses Only' sign did in effect constitute a specific exclusion of all other vehicle types. Magistrates, who are meant to carefully listen to both sides of the argument, seem to take anything the Police say as gospel.

However, if you got in front of a real judge, I suspect you'd have a far better chance of convincing him. Judges would be looking much more closely at the actual wording of the legislation involved. I also suspect that should you decide to appeal any magistrate conviction, the police would simply drop the charge. It's one thing losing in a magistrate court, it's another thing losing in a district court. If there's ont thing the Police prosecution team are afraid of, it's allowing people to use legislation to set precedents.

[Max Preload]

I think you could successfully argue, even at the JP level, that since the beginning of the motorway specifically excludes pedestrians and cyclists with individual signs, so that is the required level. Saying "Buses only" doesn't SPECIFICALLY exclude motorcycles or other vehicles entitled to use Bus lanes.

I might even spend some money having a lawyer look over this and put his/her interpretation on it.

[sAsLEX]

2.12Motorways


(3)A driver must not drive in an emergency stopping lane unless—

(c)a sign at the entrance to the lane indicates vehicles of a specified class or classes may use the lane during the time specified on the sign and the driver is operating a vehicle of that specified class or one of those specified classes.



hmm that might kill our argument! As it is not a bus lane per say? Though suggests the signage is still wrong.

[Jantar]

hmm that might kill our argument! As it is not a bus lane per say? Though suggests the signage is still wrong.
I believe that has been Transit's argument all along. Namely that they aren't bus ;lanes, but emergency stopping lanes. However as soon as they are signed with the words "Buses Only" they become bus lanes and the Bus lane rules apply.

Try and look at this whole concept through the eyes of someone who is not from Auckland, but happens to be riding over the motorway and has a good knowledge of the road rules. They see an empty lane marked "Buses Only" and no sign specifically excluding motorcycles. How are they to know that Transit has an interpretation that is different from the legislation?

[BevanPT]

Either way, you can't trust what a cop says anyway. I use the bus lane at the end of Lincoln Road (at the traffic lights) as I get the green "B" for bike signal and can change lanes without having to worry about cages. Mufti cop pulled me over last week trying to tell me I couldn't use it. Bit of an argument ensued after that and he ended up having to apologise once he got correct answer from headquarters. His excuse, he is used to the motorway bus lanes and didn't know about the different rules in the suburbs. A traffic cop that doesn't know the road rules - I would assume that the cop in the original thread doesn't actually "know" the rules and is just guessing.

[sAsLEX]

I believe that has been Transit's argument all along. Namely that they aren't bus ;lanes, but emergency stopping lanes. However as soon as they are signed with the words "Buses Only" they become bus lanes and the Bus lane rules apply.

Try and look at this whole concept through the eyes of someone who is not from Auckland, but happens to be riding over the motorway and has a good knowledge of the road rules. They see an empty lane marked "Buses Only" and no sign specifically excluding motorcycles. How are they to know that Transit has an interpretation that is different from the legislation?

I know that's how someone logical would view the problem, and they would probably follow through with a few signs specifically excluding motorcycles if they did not want them in the lane, but alas they are to ignorant to do that.

I got done a while back, before the 2004 thingy, for going through a bus lane at a set of lights in Auckland city. At the time all Auckland City bus lanes were advertised as being open to bikes. So I used it. Then got done as the intersection was under transit not the councils control!? and yet the cop who stopped me did not stop the tourist buses illegally using the intersection......yet again a case of the police not having full knowledge of the rules.... got off it after writing in, but what a pain in the arse, for doing something that according to all media I had seen was correct and the cop wouldn't have a bar of it no warning, and when questions over the Auckland Citys Councils view on bikes in bus lanes jsut used the classic "I will have to give you a ticket and you can contest it" ...... "as I really have no clue how to do my job"

[swbarnett]

A traffic cop that doesn't know the road rules - I would assume that the cop in the original thread doesn't actually "know" the rules and is just guessing.

Indeed, the law has become an ass. I heard once about the US situation - some time in the 1800s the federal statutes took up only a couple of feet of shelf space; now they take up whole libraries. NZ is probably the same.

Even if you restrict yourself to just traffic law there's no way every cop will know all the rules and all their nuances. They have to make an educated guess and sometimes they'll get it wrong. It's up to the courts to sort it out when this happens.

I have a lot of admiration for a cop that's willing to accept that they might be wrong and call for clarification.

[Patrick]

Just a further to SWBarnetts...

The legislation is being changed all the time. One simply can not keep up. What is OK one day or is worth $$ this week, may be illegal or worth more next... and that is just the Land Transport Act or Regulations and the other statutes used just for Traffic alone, let alone all the others we need to know, like the Crimes Act, Arms Act, Summary Offences Act, Misuse of Drugs Act, Children and Young Persons Act, Family protection Act(??), Summary Porcedings Act, shit... the list goes on and on...... There are literally hundreds...

[Sanx]

I had a good chat with a motorbike cop in Cyclespot a few months ago. Seemed like a nice enough chap (note to self, must increase drug dosage). He also told me that Transit didn't intend on allowing motorbikes on buslanes, but the local cops had been told not to ticket bikers as the signs weren't correct.

He also, when I later picked his brain about various things, showed me his little book full of offences. Well, when I say little, it was full of lots of scary-looking codes, figures and descriptions. Half the offences I couldn't even undersand, let alone categorise.

So, yes, I can well believe that cops find it difficult to keep up with changes in legislation.

[Jantar]

I had a good chat with a motorbike cop in Cyclespot a few months ago. Seemed like a nice enough chap (note to self, must increase drug dosage). He also told me that Transit didn't intend on allowing motorbikes on buslanes, but the local cops had been told not to ticket bikers as the signs weren't correct..
This is similar to what I have heard from a different source. Too many motorcyclists were defending their tickets on the grounds that there are no signs specifically excluding motorcycles, so the cops have been told to lay off until or unless such signs are posted.

Now I hear this from the other end of the country, so how come there are still some cops in Auckland who haven't got the message? :mellow:

[sAsLEX]

I have a lot of admiration for a cop that's willing to accept that they might be wrong and call for clarification.


Just a further to SWBarnetts...

The legislation is being changed all the time. One simply can not keep up. What is OK one day or is worth $$ this week, may be illegal or worth more next... and that is just the Land Transport Act or Regulations and the other statutes used just for Traffic alone, let alone all the others we need to know, like the Crimes Act, Arms Act, Summary Offences Act, Misuse of Drugs Act, Children and Young Persons Act, Family protection Act(??), Summary Porcedings Act, shit... the list goes on and on...... There are literally hundreds...


Both good points and understood fully.

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

[swbarnett]

Both good points and understood fully.

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Indeed. I was referring to just randomly stopping you for whatever you were doing at the time.


Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

This would be the prudent course of a confident officer. We must remember though, that a lot of the cops will be as nervous as the average public during an official meeting (they're human to). In the event that the cop digs their heels in it's the court's role to provide the definitive interpretation of the law.


But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

Nothing really wrong with this in principle but it would save a lot of time and hassle for us and the courts if they did seek a second opinion from someone that could refer to the statutes.

[Patrick]

But when the police mount a sting operation on a certain aspect of the law surely it wuold be prudent to refresh oneself with the relevant law?

Or when question polietly by a member of the public maybe radio their law expert at base?

But alas they just ticket and ask questions later.

1. Agreed... makes one look stupid, but going by the latest media cop bashing exercise, standards have dropped...:dodge:

2. Not quite as easy... Legal section are based in Wellington. Ticket and check later is often the easiest way. If wrong, it is easy to cancel the officers copy and advise the poor ticketed KBer... oops... motorist!! :innocent:

[The Stranger]

Whilst I concur with Jabez 100%, there is a little matter of the NZ Road Code 2006 which does clarify the intent of the Bus Only signage (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/roadcode/about-signs/main-types.html) (see about half way down page)

Now we are often told that the Road Code is not law, more of a guide to the law. However I wonder if there is something (law, regulation etc) elsewhere that we are unaware of which the Road Code is drawing from on this point.

[Jantar]

2. Not quite as easy... Legal section are based in Wellington. Ticket and check later is often the easiest way. If wrong, it is easy to cancel the officers copy and advise the poor ticketed KBer... oops... motorist!! :innocent:

I would partially agree with you Patrick. It is easier for the police to do it this way, but not easier for the KBer. (you were right before you corrected yourself :) ) The police officer who issues the ticket is paid his salary whether the ticket is uphelpd or cancelled, so it is easier for him.

The rider has just had his day spoiled by being stopped, and for the next part of his ride he only has his mind half on the task of riding, while he is also thinking he may be confused on his knowledge of the road rules. He is therefore in a more dangerous state to be on the road.

Once safely home he has to research, and find the appropriate piece of legislation, then write in to ask for the ticket to be cancelled. All this takes time and does have a small financial cost. The rider does not get paid for his time, nor is he compensated for the use of paper, printer, ink, postage etc.

Then he has the anxious wait to find out if the police agree with him or not. If the rider is not experienced at researching legislation, or cannot express himself clearly, then the police legal section may claim that "the fine is still payable". (I have had one or two of these).

The next stage is to defend the ticket in court. Again, the police get paid to attend. The KBer doesn't. When the motorcyclist is found not guilty, (my result the last time I defended a ticket), he has still had to take time off work (at his own expense) and may even have to pay for a lawyer.

So in my opinion, the best way is for the police officer to note time, place, the bikes registration, etc. and not even stop the rider. The police officer can then carry out his own research later, and then post a ticket out if deemed neccessary. :yes:

[avgas]

Who cares if it's legal or not... you seen the amount of shit in those bus lanes? You may avoid the traffic, but factor in spending extra cash on all the punctures you'll pick up.
Yep, or the unsuspecting motorist that plows into the side of you so they can turn down a side street.
BUS LANE BAD - I HAVE METAL TO PROVE IT

[swbarnett]

Hmmm, you sure? :dodge:

I don't imagine cops are any different to the rest of us. Particularly raw recruits still finding their feet.

[Patrick]

I would partially agree with you Patrick. It is easier for the police to do it this way, but not easier for the KBer. (you were right before you corrected yourself :)

Te hee... haven't ticketed a KBer yet )

The rider has just had his day spoiled by being stopped, and for the next part of his ride he only has his mind half on the task of riding, while he is also thinking he may be confused on his knowledge of the road rules. He is therefore in a more dangerous state to be on the road.

You're joking, right? Easily fixed. I"ll take the keys of em and send em packing, since they are in no state to drive...

Once safely home he has to research, and find the appropriate piece of legislation, then write in to ask for the ticket to be cancelled.

Not quite... officers notes on the rear, I check if in doubt myself, (which isn't often... if in doubt, I don't stop...) and if wrong, cancel it myself and post a letter. No action needed whatsoever on the aggrieved motorist...

The next stage is to defend the ticket in court. Again, the police get paid to attend. The KBer doesn't. When the motorcyclist is found not guilty,

yet to have this happen to me... what is it like? Oops, I stand corrected... it has happened, twice in 22 years... as you were...

So in my opinion, the best way is for the police officer to note time, place, the bikes registration, etc. and not even stop the rider. The police officer can then carry out his own research later, and then post a ticket out if deemed neccessary. :yes:

And the bike turns out to be stolen, or the rider (not necessarily the owner even) is disqualified or pissed... or I then have to send a letter to the owner requesting driver details, then track down the driver... sheesh... ticket now, sort later is MUCH MUCH easier... I prefer to keep it simple....

[Patrick]

I don't imagine cops are any different to the rest of us. Particularly raw recruits still finding their feet.

So they can count to 20????

[swbarnett]

ticket now, sort later is MUCH MUCH easier... I prefer to keep it simple....

I can certainly see your point. It does seem more logical to check out the "offender" while you have them in "custody". What would be nice, however, is the awarding of costs when the ticketed KBer is aquitted.

[Max Preload]

And the bike turns out to be stolen, or the rider (not necessarily the owner even) is disqualified or pissed...

Just out of interest, how many pissed motorcyclists do you encounter? I always seem to get waved through at checkpoints without being checked.

[Patrick]

Just out of interest, how many pissed motorcyclists do you encounter? I always seem to get waved through at checkpoints without being checked.

yeah, may be a presumption that the motor bike rider wouldn't be riding if pissed... I think the same of car drivers driving, but am always proved wrong, so motorbikes do get checked too (and taxi drivers!! - found a few pissed taxi drivers in my time...). Have found a couple of pissed riders, but not many in 22 years....

[Max Preload]

yeah, may be a presumption that the motor bike rider wouldn't be riding if pissed... I think the same of car drivers driving, but am always proved wrong, so motorbikes do get checked too (and taxi drivers!! - found a few pissed taxi drivers in my time...). Have found a couple of pissed riders, but not many in 22 years....

I guess. Maybe the test is seeing if they get a wobble on as they slow for the checkpoint lol

Pissed taxi drivers - the way they drive up here I would be surprised if they're not all pissed.

[Patrick]

I guess. Maybe the test is seeing if they get a wobble on as they slow for the checkpoint lol

Pissed taxi drivers - the way they drive up here I would be surprised if they're not all pissed.

Right on both calls...

[scracha]

They are getting a real beer over in uk soon. The speights pub is on a ship on its way over as we speak.Good onya mate.:clap: :clap: :clap: :drinknsin :drinknsin :drinknsin

bwhwhwhhahahahahahahahaha. You think the $hit they sell here is good beer? I reckon the speights ship will be full of wingeing kiwi's. If NZ is so good then why don't they @#$ck off ba...oh...wait....I'm getting confused.

[sAsLEX]

And the bike turns out to be stolen, or the rider (not necessarily the owner even) is disqualified or pissed... or I then have to send a letter to the owner requesting driver details, then track down the driver... sheesh... ticket now, sort later is MUCH MUCH easier... I prefer to keep it simple....

CAn you read the plate without stopping them? Call it in to check stoleness? Then pull them up?

[Patrick]

CAn you read the plate without stopping them? Call it in to check stoleness? Then pull them up?

The owner is still at work, doesn't know his home has been done over and his bike gone...

[Delphinus]

The owner is still at work, doesn't know his home has been done over and his bike gone...

Just curious, how often is this the case that you pull someone over and find its a stolen bike?

[Patrick]

Just curious, how often is this the case that you pull someone over and find its a stolen bike?

Haven't had too many bikes (most gap it, and those 1 litre plus buggers are hard to keep up with...:innocent: ) but have found plenty of cars, last one was a speeder on the Desert Rd, blew the motor and stopped at Waiouru... first thing I saw was the screwdriver sticking out the ignition:sherlock:

[BIKEGAL68]

the law on this is writen in the bike road code manual

[Sanx]

the law on this is writen in the bike road code manual

I hate to point this out, but what's written in the road code is not necessarily what happens to be the law. This particular topic is another example of something that isn't quite as cut and dried as some would have you believe.

[albanite]

Checked the Transit New Zealand website and found this media release. Bit long for a posting but shows its full context.
Presumably it is still current.

http://www.transit.govt.nz/news/MediaReleaseView.do?MediaReleaseId=nz.govt.transit .transweb.content.news.MediaRelease-7507Transit New Zealand

Auckland Regional Office

25 February 2005

Media Release
Motorcyclists and cyclists reminded not to use motorway bus lanes

Transit New Zealand wishes to remind cyclists and motorcyclists that they are not allowed to use any bus lanes on Auckland's motorways even when the new traffic rules announced by Land Transport NZ come into force on Sunday (27 February).

Transit New Zealand regional manager (acting), Richard Hancy, says the new rules, which will allow cyclists and motorcyclists to use bus lanes on other roads, do not apply to bus lanes on motorways. 'Motorways are governed by Transit Bylaw 2002/19 which only allows motorway bus lanes to be used by 'timetabled passenger service vehicles'. This bylaw overrides the new traffic rules,' he says.

Mr Hancy says that at present bus lanes on motorways are in effect 'emergency shoulder lanes' that are converted to bus lanes between 6.30am and 9.30am to accommodate morning peak periods.

'Motorcyclists cannot use these emergency lanes, even when they are temporary bus lanes, because the motorway is a high speed environment and the risk of a motorist pulling off to the side in the event of a breakdown makes it even more dangerous,' says Mr Hancy.

'As far as cyclists are concerned, like pedestrians, they have never been allowed to use the motorways and this remains unchanged.' We are, however, incorporating special cycleways off the motorways whenever possible into all our new projects. We already have a cycleway that runs alongside the causeway of the Northwestern Motorway.

Special signs reinforcing the message that the emergency lanes are for buses only in morning peak periods will be erected along the motorways.

end

[Jantar]

This bylaw overrides the new traffic rules,' he says.

Under New Zealand's legislation bylaws may not overide rules or laws set by parliament. In this case the new road rules pertaining to Motorcycles in bus lanes did allow Transit to set their own bylaws. All they had to do to keep their bylaws current was to erect signs that specifically exclude motorcyles.



Special signs reinforcing the message that the emergency lanes are for buses only in morning peak periods will be erected along the motorways.


So why hasn't that signage been erected yet? Until such signs are erected motorcycles can legally use the bus lanes on the motorway.

[sAsLEX]

Under New Zealand's legislation bylaws may not overide rules or laws set by parliament. In this case the new road rules pertaining to Motorcycles in bus lanes did allow Transit to set their own bylaws. All they had to do to keep their bylaws current was to erect signs that specifically exclude motorcyles.




So why hasn't that signage been erected yet? Until such signs are erected motorcycles can legally use the bus lanes on the motorway.

He also shoots himself in the foot by saying they are "bus lanes" not special lanes allocated to buses at times, as alluded to in a post by me above there is a way out if they were NOT bus lanes but it appears they are!

[swbarnett]

So why hasn't that signage been erected yet?

Maybe they have. Would the courts not see "Buses Only" as an implied exclusion of everything except buses?

[Jantar]

Maybe they have. Would the courts not see "Buses Only" as an implied exclusion of everything except buses?

The legislation requires Specific exclusion, not Implied exclusion.

I have asked before, but here it is again... How does a motorcyclist from outside the Auckland region know that Transit do not intend to allow motorcycles in their bus lanes if the signage does not meet the standard required in the rest of the country?

[disenfranchised]

As a side topic, does anyone know the rules for the B lights?
I assume that the B light means that vehicles in the bus lane can go.

If you're on a bike but are not in the bus lane (because you've split up beside a bus) can you go when the B light comes on, or do you have to wait for the green.
I've been going on the B...I don't want to have to ride behind a bus, they're large and unpredictable.

I've also seen cars in the bus lanes at lights (got confused about the lanes I expect)
Should a car in this situation go on the B light to clear the way, because they are in the bus lane?

[Max Preload]

Maybe they have. Would the courts not see "Buses Only" as an implied exclusion of everything except buses?


The legislation requires Specific exclusion, not Implied exclusion.

Yes. It needs to be specific exclusion of any vehicles otherwise entitled to use bus lanes, such as motorcycles. Without a sign exluding motorcycles, I can't see them being able to uphold a ticket.

[swbarnett]

The legislation requires Specific exclusion, not Implied exclusion.

I suppose it boils down to what the courts would class as specific.

[swbarnett]

I assume that the B light means that vehicles in the bus lane can go.

Even if it doesn't I don't think the bus behind you would be too pleased if you didn't.


I've also seen cars in the bus lanes at lights (got confused about the lanes I expect)
Should a car in this situation go on the B light to clear the way, because they are in the bus lane?

In this case they're breaking the law anyway so I'd say whatever they do would not matter legally. Intuitively I think it would be better if they did go on the B. These bus lanes at the lights often merge very quickly with the lane to the right.

[Jantar]

I suppose it boils down to what the courts would class as specific.

Already done. :D To be specifically excluded the signage needs to either say "Motorcycles excluded" or be a picture of a motorcycle with a red line through it. In any case the legal definition of Specific is the same as the dictionary one:

Pronunciation: spi-'si-fik
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin specificus, from Latin species
1 a : constituting or falling into a specifiable category b : sharing or being those properties of something that allow it to be referred to a particular category
2 a : restricted to a particular individual, situation, relation, or effect <a disease specific to horses> b : exerting a distinctive influence (as on a body part or a disease) <specific antibodies>
3 : free from ambiguity : ACCURATE <a specific statement of faith>
4 : of, relating to, or constituting a species and especially a biological species
5 a : being any of various arbitrary physical constants and especially one relating a quantitative attribute to unit mass, volume, or area b : imposed at a fixed rate per unit (as of weight or count) <specific import duties> -- compare AD VALOREM
synonym see SPECIAL, EXPLICIT

[Dodger]

Something to add to the mix - Wellington bus lanes

Bus Lane Use

Bus lanes are mainly for buses, but motorcycles and cycles can use them too. Some bus lanes are marked ‘Buses Only’ - motorcycles and cycles are prohibited there.

‘Buses Only’ lanes can be found:

* On the southbound route of Lambton Quay starting at Kirkcaldie's department store and continuing along Hunter Street, Customhouse Quay, and Willis Street.
Top
* On Thorndon Quay.
* In the operations area at the Lambton Interchange.

http://www.wellington.govt.nz/projects/benefits/buslanes.html

Sigh, the whole things a mess... :sick:

[sAsLEX]

As a side topic, does anyone know the rules for the B lights?
I assume that the B light means that vehicles in the bus lane can go.

If you're on a bike but are not in the bus lane (because you've split up beside a bus) can you go when the B light comes on, or do you have to wait for the green.
I've been going on the B...I don't want to have to ride behind a bus, they're large and unpredictable.

I've also seen cars in the bus lanes at lights (got confused about the lanes I expect)
Should a car in this situation go on the B light to clear the way, because they are in the bus lane?

I have asked this of the council in Auckland, and according to the the law in my interpretation, the B light only refers to Buses. SO if you are at the front of a bus lane you legally have to wait until a green disc is shown, stopping the buses behind you from getting there early phase! Go the law! The council actually suggested I just move to the side off the lane and let the buses sneak past me........... yeah right they would manage that with out driving over me!

[Sanx]

I have asked this of the council in Auckland, and according to the the law in my interpretation, the B light only refers to Buses. SO if you are at the front of a bus lane you legally have to wait until a green disc is shown, stopping the buses behind you from getting there early phase! Go the law! The council actually suggested I just move to the side off the lane and let the buses sneak past me........... yeah right they would manage that with out driving over me!

Oh that's classic. Put bus lanes in. Put priority bus traffic lights in. Allow bikers to use the bus lanes, but not the bus priority lights. Is there actually anyone with an IQ above 80 in the council, or are the entire staff complete morons?

Still, it's good for annoying buses when they pull out in front of you, having previously checked their mirrors, seen you and not given a shit.

[sAsLEX]

Oh that's classic. Put bus lanes in. Put priority bus traffic lights in. Allow bikers to use the bus lanes, but not the bus priority lights. Is there actually anyone with an IQ above 80 in the council, or are the entire staff complete morons?

Still, it's good for annoying buses when they pull out in front of you, having previously checked their mirrors, seen you and not given a shit.

Might be. But in a democracy sometimes the voice of logic and reason is drowned out.





edit: why is this <img src=http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif> in my post title? I never use them! New version of software has some bugs mods!

[kevfromcoro]

this is off topic ..but wanted to post it .....driving through town yesterday..andd a car in front stops in the middle of the road,i ast for a few minutes..tooted the horn and they moved on..then stopped again...shag this..iam thinking...big blast on the horn,,,the door flys open and this young cunt hops out and starts yelling..hurling abuse ..calling me all the names ubder the sun....then his mate gets out..and the 2 of them started booting my car in....put a big ding in the rear gaurd..fuck thinks me ..wot to do this is the main street,so i move of...they followed me...went down to the boat yard carpark... no body about...here they come...so i gave them a bit a tickle up with a lump of 4x2.. went up to auckland... got hon\me about 10 last night...there is a knock on the door,,, fucken cops,,,i wos half pissed. in they come..sits down..wot up says me///want a beer.anyway the 2 young fellas must have taken down my rego..... and have logged an asult charge....got to go down this morning and sort it. out....who is right here???might c if i can get there reg no..and get a few KB bros to do a bit more bashing..interesting thread.... all coments appreciated...KEVTHEKIWI..

[Patrick]

this is off topic ..but wanted to post it .....driving through town yesterday..andd a car in front stops in the middle of the road,i ast for a few minutes..tooted the horn and they moved on..then stopped again...shag this..iam thinking...big blast on the horn,,,the door flys open and this young cunt hops out and starts yelling..hurling abuse ..calling me all the names ubder the sun....then his mate gets out..and the 2 of them started booting my car in....put a big ding in the rear gaurd..fuck thinks me ..wot to do this is the main street,so i move of...they followed me...went down to the boat yard carpark... no body about...here they come...so i gave them a bit a tickle up with a lump of 4x2.. went up to auckland... got hon\me about 10 last night...there is a knock on the door,,, fucken cops,,,i wos half pissed. in they come..sits down..wot up says me///want a beer.anyway the 2 young fellas must have taken down my rego..... and have logged an asult charge....got to go down this morning and sort it. out....who is right here???might c if i can get there reg no..and get a few KB bros to do a bit more bashing..interesting thread.... all coments appreciated...KEVTHEKIWI..

So many possibles... them charged with intentional damage, you assault with a weapon...

Cops could see this as it reads and think the two deserved it... but its a big "could..."

[sAsLEX]

So they first damaged your property and physically threatened you.

They then proceeded to follow you to a boat yard, where they confronted you? And since you where outnumbered and where unaware of there background, they could of been military with advanced close quarters combat skills, so you picked up a 2x4 and defended yourself...

That sound like what happened to me unless:
1. You are a really big fucker
2. You broke half their bones


semi retract the following until after the guys interview at the station

But good on the cops for chasing another victim down instead of the little fucks that think, an do get away with all sorts of shit in our society!

[sAsLEX]

So many possibles... them charged with intentional damage, you assault with a weapon...

Cops could see this as it reads and think the two deserved it... but its a big "could..."

or they could turn a blind eye and see the little cunts have learnt there lesson to pick on people?!?!


But how would that look NOT charging someone?

[Patrick]

So they first damaged your property and physically threatened you.

They then proceeded to follow you to a boat yard, where they confronted you? And since you where outnumbered and where unaware of there background, they could of been military with advanced close quarters combat skills, so you picked up a 2x4 and defended yourself...

That sound like what happened to me unless:
1. You are a really big fucker
2. You broke half their bones




But good on the cops for chasing another victim down instead of the little fucks that think, an do get away with all sorts of shit in our society!


First part of post is top advice... self defence is always a goodie, as they followed you for some reason now, didn't they...

Second part? (last two lines...) :tugger:

Cops have probably been told, "This guy attacked us for no reason with a lump of 4 x 2. Here are the marks, this is his rego." And you think they shouldn't look in to it? They are looking in to the "story" of two "victims" at the mo...

[sAsLEX]

First part of post is top advice... self defence is always a goodie, as they followed you for some reason now, didn't they...

Second part? (last two lines...) :tugger:

Cops have probably been told, "This guy attacked us for no reason with a lump of 4 x 2. Here are the marks, this is his rego." And you think they shouldn't look in to it? They are looking in to the "story" of two "victims" at the mo...

Ah but you see he said he was interviewed by the cops... they might of wanted him to come in sober to get a the full story?.... so I will have to semi retract my comment until after he has talked to them..... but on hearing his story they should drop the charges and reverse them on the little punks..........

[swbarnett]

this is off topic ..

Looks like a clear case of self-defence to me. You should probably lodge a complaint against them.

[Patrick]

Ah but you see he said he was interviewed by the cops... they might of wanted him to come in sober to get a the full story?.... so I will have to semi retract my comment until after he has talked to them..... but on hearing his story they should drop the charges and reverse them on the little punks..........

Agreed.

Did say he has to go down this morning to sort it... so hasn't been interviewed?

There is the saying tho... "There is two sides to the story."

[more_fasterer]

Pity it's the word of two of them versus one of you. Good luck with it Kev.

[Patrick]

Pity it's the word of two of them versus one of you. Good luck with it Kev.

Still... the two followed him, not the other way around... and you gotta ask yourself....

[kevfromcoro]

just got back from the cop shop..the story i got was totally different to what accualtely happened..apperaly .. i ran into the back of there car.yelled verbal abuse..and tryed to run one of them over....shit i wouldnt do that in the main st..i was taking them boat club and then run them over..the cops were pretty good...came out and photo,d my car..took pics of all the dents and a few more that were there b4..lucy 3 witness es have rung ..and the cops are interviewing them.. good shit...(poor old fella get harassed by two violent youths in the main street with 100 witnes s....)dumb cunts....fancy doing that ,,at the moment waiting to c . whats going to happen......

[swbarnett]

..lucy 3 witness es have rung ..and the cops are interviewing them...

Things like this restore your faith in human nature and make me proud to be a Kiwi.

[Fub@r]

Oh that's classic. Put bus lanes in. Put priority bus traffic lights in. Allow bikers to use the bus lanes, but not the bus priority lights. Is there actually anyone with an IQ above 80 in the council, or are the entire staff complete morons?

Still, it's good for annoying buses when they pull out in front of you, having previously checked their mirrors, seen you and not given a shit.

I have to deal with Council's throughout Auckland daily.........I struggle to find anyone these days that has a pronouncable name and english is at least their second language.

For me I rarely use buslanes on suburban streets, I think its just far too dangerous. ie: cars coming across those lanes are looking for buses not motorbikes. When I have used them I've seen and experienced some close calls.

As for using a motorway buslane, I would rather lanesplit. There is so much crap in those shoulder lanes and I can't afford another tyre :) Plus you are taking on Transit and I wouldn't want to end up being part of Transit's test case.

As for that Transit statement on the previos page about the motorway being a high speed environment, they do seem to contradict themselves by saying if a car needs to exit their lane and enter the emergency lane would be a hazard during peak hours. Why have a priority lane if the traffic is travelling at high speed. I've never seen the motorway being used at high speed during rush hours, lucky if they get to 30kph

[Albino]

As a side topic, does anyone know the rules for the B lights?
I assume that the B light means that vehicles in the bus lane can go.



No, only buses can go on the B light.

So you need to make a decision to risk a ticket or to piss off the driver of the bus behind you.


btw - bus lanes and B lights only apply to buses on a scheduled route. Wing Chongs Dodgy NZ Tour bus is not legally allowed to use these.

[sAsLEX]

btw - bus lanes and B lights only apply to buses on a scheduled route. Wing Chongs Dodgy NZ Tour bus is not legally allowed to use these.

Cops in general do not know this small fact.

Even when they organised a sting on unlawful use of a certain bus lane, they failed to read, or ensure they knew the law they were cracking down on. Yes I did get a ticket, and yes I had to waste my time getting off it and now I am a rather balanced person............ big chips on each shoulder:dodge:

[Jabez]

This time the Cop didn't want to argue:argue:, but he didn't issue a ticket either... should I have expected to get an instant ticket on the spot or do they send them in the mail?... Is he just trying to scare me...He said i would have my day in court.

[disenfranchised]

No, only buses can go on the B light.

So you need to make a decision to risk a ticket or to piss off the driver of the bus behind you.


btw - bus lanes and B lights only apply to buses on a scheduled route. Wing Chongs Dodgy NZ Tour bus is not legally allowed to use these.

Current news consensus suggests that this is wrong
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/9/story.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=10465753
Very first question

[sAsLEX]

Current news consensus suggests that this is wrong
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/9/story.cfm?c_id=9&objectid=10465753
Very first question

Would suggest she is wrong. Cant be bothered finding the legislation though, but last time I read it it said buses may use the light, buses cycles and motorcycles may use bus lanes, but didnt mention the others in the B light bit.

I lie I found the link http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showpost.php?p=747300&postcount=14 read that post has the law stuff in it


But then again I have probably looked into it more than her http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/search.php?searchid=2712568

[trooper]

Have posted the correct enforcement answer below. Patrick, any comments?

[trooper]

This thread just goes on and on with arguments for and against :Playnice: but i will now simplify it into 2 categories on how i expect my staff to enforce this alleged confusing area (which isnt really confusing at all):

Auckland Motorway:
Generally an emergency shoulder modified for Bus use only during peak flow times. If any vehicle other than a bus is using the emergency shoulder they will receive an infringement notice. The actual fine is $750 although most get the $150. Both are correct infringements however the $750 is for "driving / riding a vehicle along a bus lane on the motorway" whereas the $150 is for "failed to comply with a traffic sign / lane markings". Both can apply. Its up to the officer as to which one he issues.

Auckland Suburban:
Unless specifically excluded, cycles, motorcycles, buses, enforcement and emergency service vehicles can use suburban bus lanes. If you are entitiled to use a suburban bus lane then you can take advantage of the pre-emption signal (often called the B signal).

An example of a specifically excluded area is the part of Wellesley Street, Auckland Central between Kitchener Street & Queen Street. Buses only period - no other types of vehicles. If you are not entitled to use a suburban bus lane you will be issued with an infringement notice. The fine is $150.

I hope this helps. Safe riding out there.

[sAsLEX]

This thread just goes on and on with arguments for and against :Playnice: but i will now simplify it into 2 categories on how i expect my staff to enforce this alleged confusing area (which isnt really confusing at all):

Auckland Motorway:
Generally an emergency shoulder modified for Bus use only during peak flow times. If any vehicle other than a bus is using the emergency shoulder they will receive an infringement notice. The actual fine is $750 although most get the $150. Both are correct infringements however the $750 is for "driving / riding a vehicle along a bus lane on the motorway" whereas the $150 is for "failed to comply with a traffic sign / lane markings". Both can apply. Its up to the officer as to which one he issues.

Auckland Suburban:
Unless specifically excluded, cycles, motorcycles, buses, enforcement and emergency service vehicles can use suburban bus lanes. If you are entitiled to use a suburban bus lane then you can take advantage of the pre-emption signal (often called the B signal).

An example of a specifically excluded area is the part of Wellesley Street, Auckland Central between Kitchener Street & Queen Street. Buses only period - no other types of vehicles. If you are not entitled to use a suburban bus lane you will be issued with an infringement notice. The fine is $150.

I hope this helps. Safe riding out there.

Thanks for the clarification.

It is a shame you don't follow the law. The 'Bus lanes' as you call them on the MW are signed the same as every other Bus lane I have seen so lead to a bit of difficulty for one who has read the legislation and hasn't seen the specific exclusion on the MW as there is not one there.

Where in the law does it say Bikes can use the B light?

And can you post the text of the specific exclusion, and higlight the bit that 'specifiically' identifies bikes as excluded

[Max Preload]

And can you post the text of the specific exclusion, and higlight the bit that 'specifiically' identifies bikes as excluded

This is the part that pisses me off. A sign with "buses only" does not specifically exclude other vehicles entitled to use bus lanes. That's an implied not specific exclusion.

[Max Preload]

Have posted the correct enforcement answer below. Patrick, any comments?

Haven't you actually only quoted policy? I doubt it's been tested as the cost is often prohibitive. Although you can be damn sure I'd be testing it if I got a $750 fine. In a heartbeat.

[fredie]

there are 2 sort of bus lanes here in sydney . 1- a normal BUS LANE = bus,taxi,hire cars,motorbikes,pushbike,ambo,police, can use these bus lanes :scooter::yes: 2- BUS ONLY LANES = bus only .no other vecheles at all :angry2: plus u lose points and fine if u get caught :bash: