Desperate Photo Enforcement Firms Sue Cities
Companies that operate red light cameras and speed cameras are facing increasing opposition across the country. In response, the firms have adopted a strategy of suing cities that have second thoughts about continuing to use cameras in their community. They have also been going after their own customers to collect as much revenue as possible.
On December 1, Redflex filed suit against Tempe, Arizona in Maricopa county Superior Court claiming the city owed $1.3 million in per-ticket fees for each driver mailed a photo ticket who decided to go to traffic school. The city claims it only collected $1.8 million in revenue from the program, mostly because last year’s payment rate was just 31 percent. Drivers realize in increasing numbers that tickets in the state can be ignored unless they are properly served.
“As a result of the macro economic challenges facing the US market throughout 2010, and the current politically challenging times, new contract executions have declined,” the Redflex report stated. “This financial year, Redflex has focused its efforts on strengthening its business model through tighter contract language, (and) more aggressive collection efforts in key markets.”
The main competitor to Redflex, American Traffic Solutions (ATS), has likewise been feeling the marketplace squeeze. Most recently, Los Angeles, California just terminated its red light camera program, costing the company millions. ATS lashed out at San Bernardino after its city council voted unanimously in March to cancel its photo ticketing contract with ATS before the 2014 expiration date. In an April letter, Police Chief Keith L. Kilmer offered to pay ATS CEO James Tuton $175,000 in accordance with Section 4.4 of the contract governing cancellation fees. ATS insisted that it will not allow San Bernardino to get out of the contract.
“The termination/cancellation fee is inapplicable here because Section 4.4 specifically provides for a termination and cancellation fee only ‘in the event of termination due to a breach by the municipality,'” ATS attorney Vanessa Soriano Power wrote in a May 4 letter to the city. “Thus, Section 4.4 applies only where ATS elects to terminate the agreement.”
ATS insists that San Bernardino must pay $1,896,202.05 to end photo ticketing.
[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]
Comments
Join the conversation
It continually surprises me that I don't hear of more incidents of vandalism against these cameras.
Contract fraud is contract fraud, regardless of how much you dislike the contractor or his motives. I don't really have a lot of sympathy for these cities that opened up contracts with ATS or Redflex and are now trying to weasel their way out of them because of popular pressure. They should have considered the political implications of such action before they put their names on the dotted line. What is happening now is in many cases blatant breach of contract, and like it or not ATS and Redflex are both well within their rights to sue for damages. I would rather see the law upheld than contract rights violated just so people can be more careless at intersections. Color me skeptical about all these anti-camera lobbyists who claim to be acting in the interests of democracy and the rule of law, and then turn around and demand that said laws be violated so that their agendas can be upheld.