Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I agree with Andy this repercussions that could come from it, think of the new laws that may come from it and the amount they may beef the fines up more... And yeah he shouldnt of called his solicitor because thats ridiculous! I've had neighbours like that, called the cops on my mum (if you guys saw my mum you'd understand how funny that was for me to hear) for reversing to fast out our drive way.. some people just have too much time on there hands I swear... nosey little... :)

As soon as your wheels break traction its neg driving. Ive had my brother go thru this, thru court. He lost. But this was 5 or so years ago. Didnt loose his car.

Isnt it innocent untill proven guilty...

Take them to court. And when you win see a soliciter and start the compo procedings n shit cause you had to sell your car because you were too scared to drive it, and that you fear you will be picked on again.

As for your retard neighbour fill this in. You need to give your details tho. Just say the car was blowing that much smoke you had to pull over.

Thats why you buy a GTIR and have no problems with 'losing traction'. :P  

Phil M

you obviously dont have enough power :D i know some gti-r's in canberra that still have some traction issues though i will agree they still handle awesome even with some big mods.

Hey, if we are going to call 33's whales, those GTiR pulsars - fast as they are they leave themselves open to masses of name calling... like shopping cart :(

I've been led to believe that in NSW, you have to rotate the wheel a certain number of times (3 rotations or so):burnout: to be considered neg driving. I've done a short "sqeel" (but not a sqeeley) in front of a police man (damn brass button), and was warned but not given a ticket.

The cop at that time stated he wasn't happy I wasn't more aggressive, as that would have led to a ticket.

This could of course be total garbage, and correct me if I'm wrong!

..

No they didn't impound my car. Still waiting for the ticket in the mail. They were trying to tell me I was doing 110 in a 60 zone. Which I sure wasn't - firstly it was an 80 zone. They said they could take my car for doing a burnout and I replied I didn't do a burnout and she then said she was going to cover it under neg driving. I was thinking of arguing further but thought that was probably the best compromise I could get.

The federal police definition of a burnout is:

burnout means-

"(a) in relation to a motor vehicle other than a motorbike-operate the vehicle in a way that causes the vehicle to undergo sustained loss of traction by 1 or more of the driving wheels"

I'm a little confused how they judge the sustained factor. What is their definition of sustained?

Id assume that sustained would be considered a deliberate attempt AND no genuine attempt by the driver to stop the vehicle from doing a burnout.

ie. high revs, big launch, accelerating with brake on, not stop immediately from doing a burnout [if it was an 'accident' and so on.

Most of us know when we see a car doing a burnout in the streets if he is doing it deliberately or not [consider the principle of the 'reasonable person']. So why wouldnt the police?

Phil M

you obviously dont have enough power :/ i know some gti-r's in canberra that still have some traction issues though i will agree they still handle awesome even with some big mods.

lol. I have the power, But Id rather control the power, rather than be a fool and let the power control me :>

Phil M

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...