New Orleans Must Return Millions in Speeding Fines, Louisiana AG Rules

Drivers who paid school-zone camera tickets during the 2024–2025 school year may be eligible for refunds after the Attorney General said the city collected fines without the required revenue-sharing agreements in place.

Cities That Have Refunded Red Light Camera Tickets In The Past

Some cities have implemented programs that offer refunds or have refunded red light camera tickets under certain circumstances.  

3 Years of Red Light Camera Ticket Refunds from a Class Action Lawsuit

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 lawsuits.

Class Action Suit Seeks to Refund 3 Years of Red Light Camera Tickets Issued in Santa Ana, CA

A new class-action lawsuit has been filed in Santa Ana, California, seeking refunds for three years' worth of red light camera tickets issued to drivers. The suit alleges that the city’s red light cameras violated legal standards, which could mean that thousands of citations were improperly issued. This lawsuit has caught the attention of drivers and legal experts alike, as it challenges the legitimacy of traffic enforcement practices in one of California’s major cities. Here’s what you need to know about the case and its potential impact on red light camera enforcement.

What the Class Action Lawsuit Alleges

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of affected drivers, argues that Santa Ana’s red light camera program was not operated in compliance with California state laws governing traffic cameras. Specifically, the suit claims:

1. Improper Camera Calibration and Maintenance: Allegations suggest that some cameras may not have been properly maintained or calibrated, leading to inaccurate readings and potentially unjust citations.
2. Unlawful Contracts with Camera Operators: The lawsuit also questions whether Santa Ana’s contract with its camera operators followed state regulations, which could impact the legality of the tickets issued.
3. Failure to Meet Due Process Standards: The plaintiffs argue that the ticketing process did not provide adequate information or a fair chance to contest the violations, potentially violating drivers’ due process rights.

If the court finds these allegations to be valid, it could set a precedent that affects red light camera programs across California and beyond.

Why This Could Lead to Refunds for Red Light Camera Tickets

At the heart of the lawsuit is the claim that these tickets were issued in violation of state law, which could entitle drivers to refunds. If Santa Ana’s red light camera system is found to be improperly operated or the contract is deemed unlawful, every ticket issued through the program over the past three years could be considered invalid.

For drivers who paid fines due to red light camera violations, a successful lawsuit could mean a refund of fines, which often range from $100 to $500 per ticket. Given the thousands of tickets issued annually, this could result in millions of dollars refunded to affected drivers.

How Red Light Camera Violations Work in Santa Ana, CA

Red light cameras are installed at intersections to capture images of vehicles that run red lights. In Santa Ana, as in many cities, the system automatically takes photos and videos of vehicles that cross the intersection after the light turns red. The registered owner of the vehicle then receives a citation with the violation details and a fine.

Potential Consequences for Santa Ana and Other Cities

If the class action suit succeeds, it could have a ripple effect across California and other cities that rely on red light camera programs. Here are some key implications:

1. Changes to Red Light Camera Programs: Cities may be prompted to re-evaluate their red light camera contracts, equipment standards, and ticketing processes to ensure full compliance with state laws.
2. Increased Scrutiny of Automated Traffic Enforcement: Red light camera programs, which have faced criticism for prioritizing revenue over safety, may see increased public and legal scrutiny, potentially leading to reforms or even program shutdowns.
3. Potential Refunds in Other Cities: Similar lawsuits could emerge in other jurisdictions if drivers feel their red light camera programs are not following state-mandated standards.

What Drivers in Santa Ana Should Know

If you received a red light camera ticket in Santa Ana in the last three years, you might be eligible for a refund if the class action suit succeeds. Here’s what to keep in mind:

• Stay Informed: Follow updates on the class action suit to understand if and how you might benefit.
• Check Eligibility Requirements: If the suit results in a settlement or judgment, there will likely be criteria to qualify for a refund.
• Keep Records: Hold onto any records of paid tickets, as they could be helpful if refunds become available.

Will Red Light Camera Programs Change?

This lawsuit, if successful, could influence the future of red light camera programs not only in Santa Ana but throughout California. Automated traffic enforcement has long been controversial, with critics arguing that cameras prioritize revenue over safety and may unfairly target drivers. A win for the plaintiffs could lead to tighter regulations, improved transparency, and potentially fewer automated cameras in operation.

Final Thoughts

The outcome of this class action lawsuit in Santa Ana has the potential to reshape how cities use red light cameras to enforce traffic laws. For drivers, it’s a reminder to stay informed about your rights and the evolving laws around traffic enforcement technology. If you’ve received a red light camera ticket in Santa Ana, keep an eye on this case—you may be eligible for a refund if the lawsuit prevails.

Red Light Camera Class Actions Starting

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 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.

Judge Rules Red Light Cameras Are Not Legal

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.