The introduction of roadside phone and seat belt detection cameras were meant to be a game-changer for road safety in Australia.

The idea was to use technology to catch and deter drivers from engaging in dangerous road behaviours, like using phones while driving or not wearing seat belts.

Tens of thousands of drivers have been caught in the first nine months since these cameras were rolled out in one Aussie state.

However, recent data raised community members' eyebrows and concerns about the effectiveness of this technology.

According to the Victorian Inspectorate Annual Report 2023-24, there have been doubts about whether the incidents captured on the cameras and passed on to Victoria Police were reviewed correctly.

This revelation suggested that some offenders could be slipping through due to potential system flaws.

Nine mobile and seat belt detection cameras have been deployed around Victoria, which already captured about 83,400 infringements.

Roadside cameras have already been deployed in several parts of Victoria. Image Credit: Pexels/Pat Whelen

The state government claimed that these reports were 100 per cent accurate.

Yet, the Inspectorate's report indicated that rejected photos may not have been 'sufficiently reviewed and accurately assessed'.

This discrepancy led the Victorian opposition to question the system's overall credibility.

Shadow Police Minister Brad Battin emphasised the importance of accuracy in mobile roadside cameras.

'People are more distracted on the roads than ever before. If the cameras that are supposed to detect them are letting people off, then we're going to have a bigger issue moving forward,' Minister Battin said.

'Every Victorian deserves answers.'

This is not the first time the legitimacy of mobile detection cameras has been challenged.

There were numerous instances where drivers successfully contested their fines.

A New South Wales driver had his $410 fine and ten demerit points dropped after an appeal.

The driver argued that the item in his hand could have been anything and not necessarily a phone.

Another driver contested a seat belt fine after he pointed out the grainy photos provided by authorities.

Sydney driver Andy Man also shared similar sentiments.

'There's been plenty of people I know who were mistaken for holding other objects such as wallets, cigarette cases and other objects that were not mobile phones and sadly got punished for holding a mobile phone whilst driving,' he stated.

'We cannot trust these cameras to be 100 per cent accurate or display clear images.'

The controversy surrounding mobile road cameras in Australia has extended beyond their accuracy.

Critics argued that they could also invade the driver's privacy and operate without warning, leading to unwarranted surveillance.

Many view the cameras as a revenue-raising tool rather than a road safety initiative.

As the technology continues to be used across the nation, the balance between road safety and fair enforcement remains a hot topic.

Key Takeaways

• Victorian authorities acknowledged that there could be flaws with the roadside phone and seatbelt detection cameras.
• Although 83,400 infringements have already been handed out, the Justice Department admitted that some rejected photos may not have been reviewed thoroughly.
• The state government insisted that all penalties issued have been accurate, but the Victorian opposition urged for more transparency.
• Instances of drivers successfully challenging fines also raised questions about the reliability of mobile detection cameras, with some critics viewing it as a revenue-raising tool rather than a road safety measure.

Have you or someone you know had a similar experience with these road cameras? Share your stories or opinions about this matter with us in the comments below.

 

[Veggiepatch]

The state government claimed that these reports were 100 per cent accurate.

Absolute rubbish!

Every measuring device from a builder's tape to a time keeping device to a set of scales at the butcher has an inherent error.

Anybody who has done even the most basic studies in physics would be aware of the term "metrology" - the scientific study of measurement. There are two main types of error - systematic and random.

With speed cameras, systematic errors come into to play. There may be something wrong with the instrument or its data handling system, or because the instrument is wrongly used by the operator.

Additionally, how these devices calibrated and how regularly? Who oversees the calibration process?

I could go on about this for hours but the bottom line is that these speed measuring devices are prone to error. No umms or buts.

 

[Andrew]

All this money being collected from fining motorists should be used to fix the roads. In the same way motor registration should.

 

[Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka]

When the purported Fines Victoria overnight drops 24,018.90 to be reduced by a total of $23,356.50 allegedly leaving $662.40, without any payments then something is drastically wrong!

You can download the document from:

 

[julieapol]

Yes I think they are revenue raisers and for those who choose not to where their seat belts, well maybe we should let them not wear them, natural attrition maybe.
We need to stop protecting those who choose stupid behavior. They will either learn from the mistake or not, we are becoming a nation of " Nobody told me to do or not to do that", what happened to common sense, it left when we allowed the government to tell us how we should live our lives.

 

[Hieme]

Training in the Victorian Police Force (now the Victorian Government Police Department) meant that you stopped any offending drivers and either you had the option of warning them or issuing a Summons, which later developed into an 'On the Spot' Traffic Infringement Notice. The purpose was to STOP the committing of the offence; and if necessary, you could 'Arrest' the offender if they continued to commit the offence. Taking photos and sending a fine weeks after an offence has been committed only permits the offence to continue to be committed. Taking photos and then not preventing the offence to be committed only shows the Government as condoning offences.

 

[Jest]

if one is stupid enough not obey the rules then tough luck. pay up and shut up.

 

[Jest]

The state government claimed that these reports were 100 per cent accurate.

Absolute rubbish!

Every measuring device from a builder's tape to a time keeping device to a set of scales at the butcher has an inherent error.

Anybody who has done even the most basic studies in physics would be aware of the term "metrology" - the scientific study of measurement. There are two main types of error - systematic and random.

With speed cameras, systematic errors come into to play. There may be something wrong with the instrument or its data handling system, or because the instrument is wrongly used by the operator.

Additionally, how these devices calibrated and how regularly? Who oversees the calibration process?

I could go on about this for hours but the bottom line is that these speed measuring devices are prone to error. No umms or buts.

they show a photo. if the driver does not have a seatbelt attached or they are talking on a mobile the camera does not lie. speed is a different thing. as they say a photo does not lie. FACT. I must ask have you swallowed a dictionary????

 

[RobbyNotTheRobot]

The state government claimed that these reports were 100 per cent accurate.

Absolute rubbish!

Every measuring device from a builder's tape to a time keeping device to a set of scales at the butcher has an inherent error.

Anybody who has done even the most basic studies in physics would be aware of the term "metrology" - the scientific study of measurement. There are two main types of error - systematic and random.

With speed cameras, systematic errors come into to play. There may be something wrong with the instrument or its data handling system, or because the instrument is wrongly used by the operator.

Additionally, how these devices calibrated and how regularly? Who oversees the calibration process?

I could go on about this for hours but the bottom line is that these speed measuring devices are prone to error. No umms or buts.

I used to be an Electrical/Electronic Fitter with some Electronic Engineering experience and the most basic thing is in what resistor to use and at what price. Meaning they come in different tolerances that have different costs. Even at the least tolerant it has tolerances between this and that and at what temperature of operation.
Even an Instrument maker can tell you this.
Even a speeding camera photo can be contested in court if having enough money as anyone with Photography experience can tell you there is movement in every photo and speed can be determined if knowing what the shutter speed of the camera used and the amount of blur in the photo but it's electronics that tripped the camera in the 1st place say if over speed and thus a fine is due.
Bah Humbug to anything stated at 100 per cent.