Company says i have to pay for illinois signal light violation of $100 but take $900

"...This company allows their drivers to be home every 2 weeks and still manage to drive from 2,400 to 2,800 miles a week. Pay ranges from 32-38 cents per mile based on OTR experience; 4 cent safety performance bonuses are also available."

http://www.bubbajunk.com/Trucking-Jobs/655.html

 

If he cant pay a $100 fine out of his pocket, he should probably be looking for a higher paying job. But does sound like he is being taken advantage of.

 

Why did this company even pay the fine?? Not one law that says that if a truck trailer is in an intersection when he entered on a green would be considered a traffic offience EXCEPT the NYC block the box law which means if you enter an intersection and then get stopped in traffic or stop in the intersection in traffic.

That NYC law should make anyone who is in city traffic think before "CREEPING" into an intersection! Especially if the light has been green for about a minute! Heck you're already late so do you really think blocking an intersection anywhere is worth it? NOPE! Especially in this day where some moron gets road rage and jumps on your running board with anything from a fist to knife, ball bat OR a gun!

Now I know the above was a maybe and didn't happen, BUT I'd tell the company to fight the ticket or if not then YOU fight the thing! NEVER trust a company to pay a ticket!

And READ anything that has anything to do with your pay being withdrawn out of your checks!

Heck read ANYTHING you put your name on!

If they get edgy and impatient while you read the thing then you KNOW they are
getting you to sign something detrimental to you and all in favor of them!

Do you REALLY want to work for someone like that?

 

3 cents per mile should tell you something ...

1 or 2 straight settlement deductions to pay $100, very simple ... otherwise, it sounds like a scam.

Trucker's intelligence is usually underestimated for the benefit of corrupt companies.

 

Don't know the laws in Il. But I believe photo tickets are issued to the owner of the truck. Where I live these are pure revenue enhancing tickets. I had one time when I entered a large intersection on a green and as i was turning to the left the camera stared taking pictures.
It seems that the intersection where the cameras are have half the time to get through the intersection as the ones without. Gee I wonder why?

The driver was under no obligation without due recourse to pay the fine. But since he signed zee papers, who know what he agreed to.

 

It could be what was a simple ticket turned into a failure to pay resulting in stiff extra fines. Still the guy one should of looked at what he was signing, two got a copy of what he signed

 

Sounds like Chisek figured out a way to collect some free money off those cameras too--friggin AWESOME!!

I highly recommend backing your trailer over those cameras whenever you have the opportunity.

 

The title of this thread is:

"Company says i have to pay for Illinois signal light violation of $100 but take $900".

Key word here is "i" (I) yada, yada, yada -----
The first word in the post text is "A" driver was caught,...... etc., etc., etc.

My cell mate, Denny Crane is a top jailhouse lawyer and caught that right away. Denny explained that he received a similar citation when he was a resident of Boston. Legal?
Maybe not.

I dwell in the Land-0-Fruits & Nutz, (I fall into the latter category). The city I call home is one of many cities in this state that has installed red light cameras for what the powers that be claim is in the interest of safety. The cameras snap a photo of any vehicles that run a red light. The photo clearly shows the license number of the vehicle and an easily recognizable driver, and a citation is issued and sent by mail to the registered owner of the vehicle. If it wasn't the owner driving, the owner has only to rat out who was actually driving to avoid the nearly $500 fine.

These red light cameras are also photographing some of the vehicles that are making a legal right turn after stopping for the red light, but the courts order those drivers to pay the fine anyway because they can't prove they didn't run the red light.

Considering that this city has red light cameras installed at intersections in four different locations, and each location averages around 5 to 7 citations a day. If we figure 6 citations as an average for the four intersections and $500 for the fine, that comes to $3,000 per intersection times four, the daily take is $12,000. The yearly take for the four intersections comes to $4,380,000. For those of us who are numerically challenged, that's four MILLION, three hundred eighty thousand bucks. Considering the system is automated and uses a computer to generate and mail the citation to the offender, there's no police officer necessary, so an officer's salary doesn't offset the take. The city leases the equipment from the company that installs them, and their take comes off the top first, and the city pockets the left-overs.

Hang on a minute, .............................................. OK, I'm back.
I had to be sure I'm awake and not dreamin' 'bout C.R. England's skim scam lease program. Both schemes sound similar.

I seriously doubt that the claimed reason for those intersection cameras (safety) is the whole truth. Prior to their installation there were red light runners, but few crashes. After installation, the rate of rear end collisions increased drastically, but the city won't consider that. They also moved the cameras from an intersection where the cameras actually reduced the number of red light runners, so the city wasn't gettin' enough bang for their buck. There have been instances where to increase revenue at certain intersections the amber light timing was shortened to help catch the runners who would have made it had the timing not been altered. Make no mistake, it ain't 'bout safety, --- it's the money.
Arizona residents are refusing to pay the fine because, according to their laws, a real, flesh and blood officer must witness the offense and personally issue the citation at the scene. I don't know if the red light cameras generate more money or more controversy.

Photographing a trailer in an intersection wouldn't catch the driver, so the citation would be issued to the registered owner, which is the truckin' company, and it's up to the truckin' company to play policeman/detective and determine who the driver was, --- or pay the fine themselves. For all we know, it may be possible to beat the rap there. If a company representative appears in court claiming the company is unable to determine who the driver was, it may be possible the charges would be dismissed. If so, SOMEbody is collecting from the driver illegally. To tack on an additional $800 to a $100 fine would be hard to explain no matter what a driver signed. An illegal contract from the get-go, which a driver could claim they signed under duress with a threat of job loss or pay up, --- sure sounds like extortion.

The company collecting the money should be required to provide a copy of the signed contract as well as receipts for any and all monies collected so a payee would be aware of when the debt is paid in full. No paper trail is suspicious. I'm sure that would spark the court's interest. It might be prudent for the driver to go to whomever originally came up with the repayment plan and request documentation. If they're denied that, tell those collecting the money that the next step is a conversation with the District Attorneys Office to see if they can get to the bottom of it all.
That might set up a situation of reverse extortion, and the $800 over-charge by the truckin' company could be a windfall for the driver. If the exchange rate is $800 for each one hundred dollars, that would come to $6,400 for the driver. Call it a donation.
You can bet that if the DA gets involved, it'll come to waayyy more than that, and could include jail time. If so, my celly hopes they drop their soap in the shower, and bend over to pick it up.

 

wow this is unreal....
I got one of those running up 301 in Maryland.
boss lady showed me the pic of the trailer showed me my log for that day and load i was on.....sure enough it was me lol
she said was $75 showed me the paper work on it and said your next check will reflect the total deduction.....next check showed a $75 deduction which read RED LIGHT CAM TICKET. no more hassles about the incident...
WHY DRAG out a $100 fine just pay it off and be DONE WITH IT..

 

Um... Because they're bull####?

Maybe it's just me, but the day I am asked to pay one of those is the day I'm gonna be crawling up someone's ### at City Hall. Might even end up on CNN.