Class Action Suit Seeks To Refund 3 Years Worth of Red Light Camera Tickets Issued In Santa Ana, CA  

The July 2010 Supreme Court decision (People v. Park) ruling in favor of the motorist ticketed for a red light camera ticket in Santa Ana, CA because the city lacked compliance with the requirement of Vehicle Code section 21455.5 (b) (that a municipality authorizing an automated enforcement system at an intersection comply with the prescribed warning requirements prior to issuing citations) appears to have opened the floodgates for litigation and paved the way for class actions law suits.

This is likely why the cities of Santa Ana, CA and West Hollywood, CA sent letters to the court in hopes of persuading the court to de-publish the decision, but it was to no avail as in October 2010, the Supreme Court denied the cities’ requests for de-publication.

Now, motorist Robert Plumleigh ticketed in Santa Ana at one of the sixteen camera enforced intersections where the city had failed to provide the required 30-day warning period, seeks to have all such illegally issued tickets refunded.

The suit seeks to refund tickets issued to motorists at the sixteen camera enforced intersections in Santa Ana, CA between May 2003 and November 25, 2009. The class action names the Santa Ana Police Chief, the Santa Ana City Attorney, and Red Flex (out of state camera company) as defendants, though Red Flex seeks to get out of the lawsuit, one reason being the warning period law allegedly does not apply to a private company.

Plumleigh's lawyer was given until December to file for class certification.- blog submitted by ticketbust.com, helping drivers contest and dismiss their traffic tickets.

If you get cited for a red light photo ticket, contact us at TicketBust.com or call us at (800) 850-8038. For Spanish, please visit Combatesuticket.com or call (818) 584-3689. For more information on how TicketBust can help to beat your cell phone ticket, visit fightcellphonetickets.com or call (800) 850-8038.

Class Action Law Suits in Louisiana

Orleans Parish District Court Judge Kern Reese on Friday granted the city of New Orleans' motion to continue a class certification hearing in a red light camera case until Sept. 24.

The city filed the motion to continue through assistant city attorney Detrich Hebert.

The motion cites Louisiana State Civil Procedure Article 592 (3)(a) and states that the "hearing on a class certification is improper because the city has not made an appearance before the court in the present matter." It also states that "the city has not had adequate time to conduct discovery because there are numerous other traffic camera violation cases that are consuming counsel's time."

Metairie lawyer Joseph McMahon III filed the class action claiming the cameras that catch motorists breaking the law are illegal. Reese threw out a red light camera ticket issued against McMahon in 2008.

McMahon has filed similar lawsuits in Jefferson Parish and in Lafayette, La.

Red light camera revenue has been used for various public works projects in Orleans and Jefferson Parishes. The Times-Picayune reported that New Orleans has used most of the nearly $10 million generated from red light cameras towards the rebuilding of roads throughout the city while Jefferson Parish has held nearly $15 million in escrow until all appeals are exhausted.

McMahon's other cases against red light cameras in Louisiana are still ongoing.

But in May 2009, U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance threw out a similar case, stating that McMahon and his lawyer, Anthony Maska, failed to show that Jefferson Parish's system is unconstitutional. Maska and McMahon have taken their case back to state court.

In Lafayette, a state judge threw out the bulk of McMahon's lawsuit against the city's traffic cameras that sought to prove the program is unlawful for turning traffic tickets into civil violations.

McMahon and Maska are now attempting the same argument they've made in New Orleans, alleging that in the Lafayette system, someone must see the traffic violation in order to validate the image of the purported crime provided by the red light camera.

New Orleans adopted the red light camera system in April 2008 after a private firm, American Traffic Solutions Inc., won an open-bidding contract to install and run the cameras and issue citations and fines to motorists.  Read.

In a ruling that could have implications for other cities, a circuit court judge ruled Monday morning that the city of Aventura, Florida cannot use cameras to catch red light runners.  However, it did not file an injunction ordering the city to stop using the cameras. The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by a motorist who argued that only the state Legislature can pass laws regarding traffic violations. Cities have gotten around the lack of state authorization by citing red light runners with a code violation, rather than a traffic ticket.

The city can appeal the ruling by Circuit Court Judge Jerald Bagley, and the judge's decision has no bearing on other cities nor did it invalid the constitutionality of red-light programs. But if it stays in force, the ruling could set a legal precedent that could be used in suits against red-light camera programs in other cities.

Other South Florida cities have similar ways to catch speeders and beef up city revenues, so the ruling against the cameras could open the flood gates to challenges. Cities, like Aventura, Miami Beach, Pembroke Pines and others, have used cameras to cite red light runners with a code violation, instead of a traffic violation. Lusskin argued that was merely a way of circumventing the state law and that cities could only issue tickets to red light runners if an officer is present.

In his ruling Monday morning, Bagley sided with Lusskin and granted his motion for summary judgment against Aventura.

The lawyer representing Aventura city attorney Michael S. Popok said that the judge's ruling only addressed whether or not cities can issue fines based on the red-light cameras - and not the presence of the cameras themselves or the program. The state charter says that cities have the power to use ``security devices'' to ``regulate'' what occurs on the roadways, and the issue, according to Popok, is whether or not the word ``regulate'' gives cities the authority to issue fines.

The judge did not issue an injunction against the program as part of his ruling, so it can continue to operate while the city decides whether or not to file an appeal.

San Jose Mercury News - Feb. 10, 2010

At least 3,000 drivers will get money back for red light tickets in South San Francisco, thanks to an error in finalizing the contract with the company that installed the cameras.   Officials in this San Francisco suburb say the city council neglected to ratify the contract with American Traffic Solutions Inc., which installed the cameras last summer. That means the city could not legally operate the automatic cameras.  The contract was finally ratified Jan. 27.

Mayor Mark Addiego says the city contacting motorists caught by the red light cameras between Aug. 15 and Jan. 27 to pay back the $446 fine or the cost of traffic school. Officials say the refund will cost the city at least $1.4 million, in addition to thousands in staff costs needed to help figure out whom to refund.

Drivers in a Class Action Law Suit seek more than $23 million in reimbursements, the amount that the cities paid to the contractor. The California Supreme Court has agreed to decide whether tens of thousands of drivers in San Francisco and other cities can seek partial refunds of the fines they paid for running red lights before 2004, when the private contractor that operated traffic cameras at intersections got a cut of the money from each ticket. ACS State and Local Solutions, typically got about one-third of each red-light fine. That fine is now $380 but was less during the years covered by the case. The Legislature has prohibited such fee arrangements since 2004 and instead requires cities to pay contractors a flat rate for their work, regardless of the number of tickets issued or fines collected. The court case involves tickets issued during the preceding four years.

The case is a consolidation of suits filed on behalf of about 300,000 ticketed drivers in 14 cities and Los Angeles County, plaintiffs' lawyers said Thursday. The cities include San Francisco, Santa Rosa, Redwood City and Cupertino.

See these recent stories below.

Philadelphia - http://www.nbc10.com/news/17706251/detail.html
San Diego - http://www.cbs8.com/story.php?id=141872#