Wife got served for a photo radar ticket today.

[Rick Lee]

In AZ a lot of folks blow these tickets off, as they require in-person service from a process server and go away if it can't be done within 120 days. Turns out Scottsdale is ignoring the law using what's called "alternate service." A process server files an affidavit that they made three in-person attempts, once in the morning, midday and evening, with no success. Then the judge says they can just tape it to your door and you're considered served.

This process server's affidavit consists of three egregious lies and I want to pursue her for it. Of course, doing so would admit we were notified. However, the judge only granted this "alternate service" based on a false affidavit. I think someone here still has to follow the law, no?

Process server lists first attempt as "garage door open, no vehicle in garage, knocked on door, no answer." Well, we have a three car garage, three vehicles and two drivers. How could we have all three vehicles gone with only two drivers AND leave the garage door open while we're away? Never ever has happened or could happen.

Next attempt was knock at the door at 8:22pm on a night I know we were both home. Never heard it, lights were on, were watching tv at that time.

Next attempt was at 8:22am on a day I was at home. I work from home, never leave the house before lunch and never start a minute after 8am. My standing desk is about 20 ft. behind the front door. Never heard any knock. That one also says my neighbor (lists his address, but not name) confirmed my wife lives here. She's never met him and he surely does not know her name. I will ask him tomorrow about this. If he says it never happened, I'll ask him to sign an affidavit.

Anyway, my wife is probably SOL on this, but it really chaps my ass that Scottsdale is ignoring the state law on proper service and this process server totally fabircated her attempts at personal service. My wife has prepaid legal through work, so we may go that route.

[chocolatelab]

Rick

You ever see that story about the guy in phoenix who got 50 plus photo tickets on the 51 but was wearing a gorilla mask. Details are a little fuzzy but I think I am close.

What an absolute pain in the a**.

There has got to be someone who has figured a work around on it.

If you fight the affidavit and prove its crap my guess is the ticket still stays in play.

[Rick Lee]

Yes, they eventually got the guy in the monkey mask. But the irony is that the law says photo radar tix can't be used in criminal speeding cases. And a lot of his were for 20 over, which is criminal, so he skated on those.

Anyway, if the judge granted the alternate service based on a false affidavit, I'd think the service would have to be tossed too, no?

[chocolatelab]

I wonder if the judge would say.....

Mr Lee you are correct it appears the service was not legitimate and shall be stricken.

Oh one other thing while you are here. It appears the Scottsdale PD has been trying to serve you for a speeding ticket. No sense in tracking you down at home so please consider this being served.....

I am no lawyer but I don think this is a double jeopardy type situation.

For the record I hate photo tickets. Just takes all the sport out of it.

[Rick Lee]

Well, I wasn't the one being served, but I probably still can file a complaint against the process server and then have a lawyer get it quashed. In AZ they send you a letter asking you to waive service, which almost no one does. I'm pretty sure filing a complaint with the court or whomever orders the process server to your house cannot be considered proper service. The law requires either the defendant's signature or personal service to an adult that resides at the residence and has to be done at the residence. Of course, they're already ignoring the law. So what's to stop them from doing as you suggest?

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Even though you're right you're wrong. Welcome to the wonderful world of revenue generation - where laws and government accountability to the people it supposedly serves does not exist.

The reality is the US has become as corrupt as Mexico or soviet Russia with respect to using cars and traffic as a way of extorting money from the public. There is little or no legitimacy to any of it but the reality is if you want to drive, you simply accept the fact that occasionally you will be required to pay up regardless of whether or not you're in the right.

I'm as pissed as you are about the fact that a major part of peoples lives is so blatantly tied into flagrantly unconstitutional behavior but until someone starts demanding change in the state legislatures (which will never happen because it would alienate all the boo-boo nanny-state safety nazis) it will continue. Just a part of life, much like carrying a little envelope with some currency under the seat is/was in many other countries...

[968rz]

Tough one but:
She broke the law and got caught, at this point she will have to pay up no matter what (they stated they followed the law in regards to serving the paper and now expect payment).

The questions now are should this government agency be allowed to continue to break the laws it has passed (you can guaranty they've done this before) and do you want to be the one to start the investigation?

[Joeaksa]

Originally Posted by 968rz

The questions now are should this government agency be allowed to continue to break the laws it has passed (you can guaranty they've done this before) and do you want to be the one to start the investigation?

This is the crux of the argument and one that should be fought. The city cannot break the law trying to "enhance its coffers!"

Get a lawyer...

[patssle]

"garage door open, no vehicle in garage, knocked on door, no answer."

What the heck is that? Do you live in California Jr or something?

[Hawktel]

I'm surprised they don't get shot more often.

The Camera's, not the Server.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by Hawktel

I'm surprised they don't get shot more often.

The Camera's, not the Server.

This is a separate issue, but with these cameras, if you don't see the flash (the sun is pretty bright out here), you have no idea you did anything wrong until weeks later when you get a ticket in the mail. (Wife says she never saw it.) So, if you were speeding, chances are you will continue. The state does not want you to slow down, as that would mean less $$ for them. And if you shut up and pay, they leave it off yout DMV record as a reward. When I've been pulled over by a cop, they usually tell me to slow down, even if they don't cite me and then I do drive a little more carefully for a while. The last time I got nailed, the cop didn't even tell me slow down. He just wrote me. They really want you to speed.

Anyway, I'll be keeping an eye out for the neighbor today to see if he talked with a process server. Next week I'll call the process server's employer and tell them a complaint is coming unless they retract that affadavit. I don't know that such a thing is possible, but I'd think they'd rather nip something like this in the bud instead of having a judge decide it. I'm still trying to figure out the lunacy of how someone can claim a two-driver household can have all three vehicles gone and, if they were away, leaves the house with the garage door open. Even while my 993 was having its front bumper replaced, we never left the house with the garage open and so there would have always been a car and/or a bike parked in the main space.

[RWebb]

better if a lawyer sends that letter

are you certain about the law on service? are you certain there is no other law saying that "upon any 3 attempts at service respecting any violation of any AireyZonker law or allegation alleged thereupon, service shall be effected if a notice is mailed to said def. or posted upon the entrance of any address known to have been used by said def. their progeny, assigns, heirs, domestic animals or resident squirrels, great uncle twice removed or yada yada?

you are sure there are no other statutes, rules, regulations or common law that might allow them to effect sefvice on you in this manner?

[BE911SC]

I got a photo ticket in a school zone--I accelerated a moment too soon leaving the zone and flash. On the summons I wrote a short explanation saying I have school-age kids of my own and I always drive slowly around schools and parks (true). I explained that I merely began accelerating too soon and was cited. They cancelled the citation and no fine. Worth a try.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by RWebb

you are sure there are no other statutes, rules, regulations or common law that might allow them to effect sefvice on you in this manner?

Well, I'm not totally sure, but Scottsdale is the only place in AZ doing it, which suggests it's really bending the law, since plenty of other cities are more strapped for funds than Scottsdale, but aren't doing it. Here's what I've found:

The defendant has 90 days from the date of filing to be served with the citation, pursuant to A.R.S. § 28-1592(B)(2). After 120 days, the court shall dismiss the citation, pursuant to Rule 4(i), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure. One of several things may occur in the time period between the 90 and 120 days, such as:

1. Prior to the end of the 90 day period for service, the prosecutor may file a motion with the court to extend the time for service.

2. The court can create a local Administrative Order that allows the court to dismiss any photo enforcement case not served or acknowledged after 90 days from the date of filing.

3. The prosecutor can file a standing motion with the court to dismiss any photo enforcement case not served or acknowledged after 90 days from the date of filing.
D. FAILURE TO APPEAR CIVIL TRAFFIC Similar to other civil traffic cases, when a defendant fails to appear for the scheduled arraignment date on a civil traffic photo enforcement case, the court has the authority to default the defendant IF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING OCCURS:

1. The court MUST have a document signed by the defendant that indicates the defendant is waiving service of the complaint, OR An affidavit of service was filed with the court stating the defendant was personally served with the complaint.
2. The defendant signed up to attend DDS but failed to attend.

3. The defendant failed to appear for a hearing after receiving written notice of the civil traffic hearing date/time/place and signed either a waiver of service or signed for the civil traffic hearing date. In any of these instances, the court has the authority to impose default judgment

Rule 4(d). Process; By Whom Served
Service of process shall be by a sheriff, a sheriff's deputy, a private process server registered with the clerk of the court pursuant to subpart (e) of this Rule, or any other person specially appointed by the court, except that a subpoena may be served as provided in Rule 45. Service of process may also be made by a party or that party's attorney where expressly authorized by these Rules. A private process server or specially appointed person shall be not less than twenty-one (21) years of age and shall not be a party, an attorney, or the employee of an attorney in the action whose process is being served. Special appointments to serve process shall be requested by motion to the presiding Superior Court judge and the court's ruling shall be recorded by minute entry. Special appointments shall be granted freely, are valid only for the cause specified in the motion, and do not constitute an appointment as a registered private process server.

Rule 4(g). Return of Service
If service is not accepted or waived, then the person effecting service shall make proof thereof to the court. When the process is served by a sheriff or a sheriff's deputy, the return shall be officially endorsed on or attached thereto and returned to the court promptly. If served by a person other than the sheriff or a deputy sheriff, return and proof of service shall be made promptly by affidavit thereof. Each such affidavit of a registered private process server shall include clear reference to the county where that private process server is registered. When the summons is served by publication, the return of the person making such service shall be made in the manner specified in Rules 4.1(n) and 4.2(e) of these Rules. Proof of service in a place not within any judicial district of the United States shall, if effected under paragraph (1) of Rule 4.2(h), be made pursuant to the applicable treaty or convention; and shall, if effected under paragraph (2) or (3) thereof, include a receipt signed by the addressee or other evidence of delivery to the addressee satisfactory to the court. In any event the return shall be made within the time during which the person served must respond to process. Failure to make proof of service does not affect the validity thereof.

Rule 4(i). Summons; Time Limit for Service
If service of the summons and complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint, the court, upon motion or on its own initiative after notice to the plaintiff, shall dismiss the action without prejudice as to that defendant or direct that service be effected within a specified time; provided that if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court shall extend the time for service for an appropriate period. This subdivision does not apply to service in a foreign country pursuant to Rule 4.2(h), (i), (j) and (k)

[RWebb]

in Oregon there are 3 different places you have to look for any case (each 'place' is hundreds of pages lone) - if you're lucky Ariz. is more rational and the above is the only thing that applies

personal service is a term of art (technical term) in law, be sure it means served in person in Az. as it may not

has it been 120 days yet? did a Ct. extend the time for service?

an atty can check that w/o your wife knowing anything about it... but if anyone calls the Ct. or has to log in to check on it, then the question that comes to mind is "how did they know to check on this? they must be lying..."

anyway, post your future adventures in this

[Rick Lee]

Ah yes, the checking the website thing was a big issue here for a while. When they mail you the ticket, they give you a case number to go look up on the court's website. For a while the court was considering you served if you logged in your case number. But since that is not considered personal service, it was tossed out and so you can look up your case, call about it, whatever, and you're not considered served until you've either signed a waiver of service, enrolled in traffic school or the process server has personally handed the complaint to a "competent adult residing at that address." Lots of folks have had their kids accept the service and then the parent was still considered served, which I think should eventually be tossed out in court. I know a guy who got served in his swimming pool. The server came into the backyard, asked he was so and so, he said yes, not knowing who was asking and that was all they needed to drop the complaint on the ground and mark him served. I've also heard they just need to personally see the car from the photo also parked at the address to which it's registered. None of this happened to us.

I guess we'll know more on Mon. when wifey talks to the lawyer. Who knows? Maybe it'll be a lawyer who's been dying to pursue a case like this and get his name in the paper. Since only Scottsdale is doing this, it would make some news if someone beat it.

[R K T]

I DO NOT miss living in Prescott!!!!!!
We couldn't go a half mile without seeing a radar van. You drive into Prescott Valley and there's the "Welcome to Prescott Valley" sign and 50 feet beyond the sign is a permanent Radar Gun flashing at cars. Yeah.....Welcome, and here's your ticket.

[Rick Lee]

Just spoke with the neighbor. He assured me he never spoke with anyone about this and he would never do so. In fact, he said another neighbor came to him with the same question. Seems this is pattern with these process servers. I really want to go after this liar.

[RWebb]

some unknown person could always log in to their server (public server, right?) from a library or a public WiFi hotspot, then look a series of random numbers, one of which just happened to be that number...

good - the neighbor will need to an affidavit or decl. (if allowed) at minimum, and may need to appear in court, be deposed etc. depending on how big a fight this becomes

[pwd72s]

Do speeding cameras use radar? If so...why no V-1?

(edit)...Of course, this is all about revenue. Public safety has zilch to do with it.