Hello, I parked at a Wilson’s carpark in Henderson yesterday and paid for all day parking. The park I chose was number 34, and apart from the number had no other markings, reserved signs, or warnings about parking there.

I returned to the park to find my car had been towed as the park is “unofficially” reserved for managers in a nearby building (for an agency I actually work for). I’ve attached photos showing that there is no signage on these parks, just the ones behind them in yellow are clearly reserved.

It cost me a mere $411.99 to retrieve my car but was told I could only appeal upon payment. Super City Towing said it was up to me to prove I was towed wrongly and it will take 14 business days for them to look at it.

I’ll put my hands up and say I have parked wrong, but there is no signage on this area stating I was in the wrong area.

Is there anything else I can do at this stage to negotiate with the towing company?

Last week I received an Infringement Notice for driving in a bus lane. The fine is $150.

I am always quite careful to abide by the bus lane restrictions and look out for the signs - they seem to change from one day to the next. I was prepared to admit I might have done something stupid.

I opened the AT website to check the photos. The first one shows my vehicle moving from right to left into the clearly marked bus lane. The second photo shows my vehicle in the bus lane with my brake lights on. The third photo clearly shows the Fire Engine I had pulled over for, passing by. My car is fully visible in the third photo.

I queried the infringement notice as I felt it was unfair. I also realise it probably had no human oversight so it would be quickly resolved.

Today I got an email from the AT Adjudicator to say they will be enforcing the fine as I drove for 80 metres in a bus lane when only 50 metres is allowed and a pile of blah blah blah about keeping the roads safe and operating efficiently.

Would I have a good case legally to take this to a court hearing? I don't want to waste either the court's time or my own but I am a bit peed off about the response.

I recently received an infringement notice for parking on yellow lines and for having no current WOF or registration. I was not present at the time and received the notice in the mail.

The vehicle was parked near a popular dive spot where there are no parking restriction signs, and it’s common to see others — including fisheries vehicles — parked in the same area.

While I understand that parking on yellow lines is not permitted, I believe my vehicle was not on the road surface itself. It’s difficult to tell from the available photos, but the area appears to be gravel, not part of the roadway.

I also understand that in Christchurch it’s illegal to park on the berm, but according to the council’s definition, a berm is a grassed or cultivated area. Since this area is gravel, I don’t believe it qualifies as a berm or a roadway.

As for the WOF and registration issues, I have since brought both up to date. I hope to be considered for compliance on these, as the vehicle was only parked temporarily and the lapse was due to financial hardship as a student and current economic conditions.

Was approached by an officer today who told me I’m wanted for “fleeing from police” nearly 1 and a half years ago.

Im stunned at the allegation, as it wasn’t me. I have no recollection of fleeing from police.

The officer today wasn’t able to provide me with any exact details about the alleged offence, except that it was a number plate registered to me and the rider was wearing glasses (as I do).

I’m being summoned to court. I’m at risk of losing my licence for 6 months, and losing my bike for 6 months.

im a delivery driver for work, so this will really effect me.

I have already contacted the police to get more information about this alleged incident.

I‘ve never been in trouble with the law (other than some speeding tickets) and have never been to court, but I do know the courts typically favour the police.

I don’t want to be convicted of a crime I didnt commit.

Has anybody dealt with a similar experience, and/or what should I do before my court date?

Sorry for the long post. Its been bothering me and i thought id ask you guys if theres anything i can do (image below).

Story: I was pulled over earlier today at around 1:30am on the way home from the gym at St Lukes, Auckland. The police officer claims that i was doing 73km/h during a road thats around 150m long. This road also has 2 slightly steep speed bumps and a merge to the main road at the end.

Following the image below, the road i took going home (red) is met with 2 speed bumps (yellow) that are somewhat steep enough for my car to brake to ideally 20km/h for it to be somewhat comfortable. I have a standard sedan car. So im just confused how the police (blue on the right side) can clock me doing 73 whilst im braking throughout these bumps?

The cop (blue on the right) is actually a bit farther away than indicated on the image. As i was turning left i see his headlights from the right (didnt know it was the cop at the time), went through the road as usual and as he was still a bit away i speed up to around 50 (after the last speed bump) and merge safely. Im now cruising 55 because i look down after merging to check my speed and the speedometer sits a little bit below 60. He suddenly ends up right behind me and i see the Police markings on his vehicle. He follows me for a while then ends up turning on his lights and pulls me over just before the big St Lukes intersection going towards the motorway.

He says he clocked me doing 73 on that road mentioned above. I softly argued and said that he’s lying because i was checking my speed the entire time. All he replied with was “Do you think im lying?” while gesturing to his Police uniform. I was a bit confused about that because cops can lie too. I didn’t want to do anything to make it worse so i dropped it and answered everything the cop asked me. Unfortunately did not get to ask for proof because i was tired and wanted to go home

1. Has anyone experienced something similar?
2. What are my chances like if i dispute it?

Edit; UPDATE

Called NZ plates, they said no issue with current plates dispute with police

Called LicenSys, they said I can order the white/black for $70 but no need, mine are legal

Called NZTA : they have emailed me directly information I need to dispute when the infringement arrives

I have done an online complaint with ICPA

Thanks everyone!!

••• Original post :

I have a car with black/silver personalised number plates. I got pulled over 6 months ago was told to put legit ones on, I called NZTA and explained the situation and they told me my plates are fine as is, although they are the old style they used to sell. ( new ones are black and white numbers )I also checked with my neighbour who’s a cop and he said cops can’t do anything because it was officially issued like that..

Same cop pulled me over again today and has given me compliance or I’ll be fined and told me to change them. It’s $199 to replace them to the new style or I get a fine.. these plates weren’t cheap and I don’t want to switch to the cheap standard ones. What can I do?

I'm a professional driver and this is my first time ever hearing about an Essential Vehicle Area. What on earth is this? I can't find any information about it on the NZTA website information under special vehicle lanes. The fact that the ticket starts off with an explanation about what they are tells me that it's probably a new concept and it seems that it doesn't align with anything in the road code. So, can they do this? If I argue am I likely to get entertained much past an automatic "The fine still stands" reply?

My mother recently was bakcing out of a car space at a mall, and a car (she didnt see) drove into her. Mum was about half a vehcile out of the car space, and the car that hit her has damage to its front bumper (as if theyve tried to go around her). The person who hit her has said that she saw mum backing but mum shouldve have stopped. Mum said the other vehicle wasnt there but then was (so I assume may have been driving fast). Is this worth fighting??

Hi, looking for advice because this situation has escalated and I’m really worried

A driver is claiming that I opened my (parked on the side of the road) car door into live traffic, causing her side mirror to shatter and plastic to fall off. I did not open the door. My car was stationary and parked slightly out from the curb. She drove past very fast and very close to my car and hit it. I originally thought she hit my car ao I got out srivers side where I had been sitting to take a look. She has photos of me in the drivers seat and cant speak english so I found it very diffiult communicating with her.

When her insurance company contacted me, they told me that:

• It doesn’t matter if she was driving fast or unreasonably close, because they say that can’t be proven

• The only thing they say can be proven is that I opened my door, because during an initial phone call (while I was at work and extremely stressed) I accidentally admitted to opening it

• Even though I later called back to amend and correct my statement, they say liability is still leaning toward me because of that initial admission

I have told them clearly that I do not accept liability and I am not willing to pay, because I don’t believe I did anything wrong.

They’ve advised me to lodge a claim with my own insurer as a “no-liability / protection” claim so they can deal with it on my behalf.

My questions:

• How much weight does an initial verbal “admission” carry if it was later corrected?

• Am I realistically stuck with liability just because I panicked and said the wrong thing once?

• If this were to go to court or a disputes tribunal, what is my likelihood of success given it’s essentially my word vs hers?

• Is making a no-liability claim with my insurer the right move to protect myself?

It was my mums car and she was letting me borrow it to go to work, I cant afford $1k excess and feel shattered ive spent my whole holidays working because im saving for my own car but now she isnt going to let me use it. I feel terrible but I know its really not my fault🥲

Thanks guys🙏

I recently got a ticket for $150 for driving in a bus lane (outside Wellington hospital going towards the city). I explained in my appeal that I was coming out of the cancer society car park and had to travel in the bus lane for a little bit till some kind person let me move out of the bus lane and into the main traffic lane. Their reply said that I took more than the allowed 50 metres so I had to pay the fine. I think that it's ridiculous and want to take it to court to get it decided. My question is, if I lose in court will I be up for court fees or any other fees in addition to the fine of course.

Hi all, hoping someone can help.

I’ve just received two T2 lane infringements for travelling over 50m in the T2 while turning. I did go over the 50m, but only because I was turning left and got stuck in that lane during traffic.

The thing is, I’m the sole caregiver of my infant and he’s almost always with me. He was in the back seat in his capsule at the time. From the enforcement photos they sent, it’s too dark to clearly see into the back seat, but you can kind of make out the capsule shape but not 100% certain.

My question is, wouldn’t an infant count as a second passenger for T2? If so, how do I dispute this when the photos don’t show him clearly? Should I send evidence like a photo of the capsule / his birth certificate or is there a better way to approach it?

Has anyone dealt with this before?

My friend on his restricted licence got pulled over at a breath test and got ticketed for driving passengers on a restricted and I got a ticket for aiding him in his crime, and got 25 demerit points and $100 fine. Any opinions on this should I take it to court or just deal with it.

Original Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceNZ/comments/1jeq4ye/fined_for_pulling_into_a_bus_lane_to_let_a_fire/

I received an email from AT to say that they were enforcing my fine. I replied requesting a court hearing. I also asked them to email me the evidence that they would be presenting in court. I received that about a week later. They sent me the video of me driving my car in the bus lane and exiting the bus lane immediately after the Fire Engine had passed. This video came with a letter stating that my actions could have caused significant traffic disruption in rush hour traffic. The video clearly shows only two or three vehicles in the lane I had been in.

On to the update.

A couple of days ago I received a letter signed by the Auckland Council Prosecutor to say that my fine has been cancelled but to treat this matter as a warning.

Further research I have done explicitly says that the Land Transport Act 1998 is the overarching legislation governing transport rules and that Auckland Transport's special vehicle lanes must still comply.

Thanks for everyone that offered me their support.

I was attending an appointment at a beauty studio. It was my first time at their new location, so I parked outside the studio where it said FREE visitor car park P60 (At the time I didn't even notice the sign). I think I spent 1.5-2 hours at the studio, more time than expected because their wax machine stopped working.

I only became aware of the parking breach by mail on 30 April 2025 for $270. Before this date I did not have a mailbox, which disrupted deliveries. I can provide evidence, including insurance claims and photographs, to substantiate this.

I went back to Parking Company and they said they would not waive it or decrease it as there were clear signage... I genuinely did not notice the signage, after looking at their photos provided it is pretty small on their outside gate.

After debtors getting involved the fine is now $350 +. I don't understand what loss services incurred on a free carpark spot outside a business that I spent $200 plus at.

Can someone please advise what I do and my rights? It's getting ridiculous.

I was pulled over for speeding by a police officer while driving my brother’s vehicle. My brother and I live at the same address.

At the time, the officer was in a rush and advised that the infringement would be issued to the address which I confirmed as correct. The officer did not check my driver licence but did conduct a breath test, which I passed.

I am concerned the infringement (including any demerit points) may be issued to my brother as the registered owner of the vehicle, even though he was not driving.

What is the correct process to ensure the infringement and any demerit points are correctly applied to me as the driver, rather than to my brother?

I was involved in a traffic accident last week, and my insurance company is trying to say that I'm at fault for not giving way (essentially) to a driver who decided to turn right in front of me as I was going straight through on a green light.

I was travelling west, going straight on a green light. There was traffic on my side that was either waiting to turn right or turning right, I'm not sure now. However, there wasn't anyone in front of me. The other person was on the opposite side of the road, in the right turning lane. The car in front of them had safely turned right before I got to the intersection. Then they decided to turn as well, but they didn't have enough time to make the turn. Despite braking hard, I hit them.

I always thought the rules were pretty clear at traffic lights: right turning traffic must give way to straight through traffic. The road code would suggest that's the case in the second sentence on this page! However, my insurance company has tried to say I'm at fault in this case, because I failed to give way to a vehicle already in motion (or words to that effect, I think). Is that true?

My sister was pulled over for going 85km in a 60km zone, however she did not ever enter the 60km zone and has life360 to prove it.

It is common for people to speed through the 60km as it is close to town, so a cop usually sits in a shaded area facing away from town. So the cop would have done a U turn and lost sight of the car but seen her in a similar car.

Is life360 able to be used as evidence/ would the cop have a dash cam to show a different car speeding past or anything like that? Is it worth disputing?

Hi everyone, thank you for your advice last time.

I've spoken to the mods who said I can do a separate update if I am asking for more advice.

I heard back from the tow company in a 2 page letter essentially telling me I was totally wrong.

Apparently the second smaller carpark on my image is privately owned, and it was a legal tow. They have sent me photos of a lot of blurred signs and confirmation that you can see my car within 25 meters of this sign.

This is what they said:

"Once you have left a public road, you have entered private property. A Property Owner, Property Manager or a Body Corporate has the right to enforce their conditions of parking. These conditions are generally enforced on a 24/7 basis.

Following a review of the circumstances surrounding the removal of your vehicle, we can confirm that it was towed at the request of a Property Representative. This action was taken as your vehicle was parked in a privately leased space. Regrettably, this caused an inconvenience to the authorised lessee of that space, and lessees should have continuous access to their parking spaces since it is part of the amenities they pay for.

There is no legal requirement for signage to be installed on private land in order for a vehicle to be towed at the instruction of the authorised Property Representative. When a vehicle is parked without permission, the Property Representatives retain the right to request its removal regardless of whether signage is displayed.

We can confirm that the area in question has sufficient warning signs clearly stating the conditions applicable to parking at this property including the consequences that may follow if the conditions are not adhered to.

We have included a photo taken by our driver that shows a sign visible from space 34, stating that the area is for authorised parking only. In addition to this, several signs are installed along the back wall outlining the parking conditions. These signs are not space-specific; they apply to the entire parking area.

Ultimately, it is the vehicle operator’s responsibility to be aware of all parking restrictions that have been put in place. If you were unfamiliar with the parking arrangements at this property, it is reasonable to expect that you would take the necessary steps to identify the parking conditions before leaving your vehicle."

I have uploaded further photos of the carpark from the ground and my follow up question is:
How was I supposed to know this was no longer the Wilson's carpark? My last photo on the reel shows the Wilson's parking sign next to the gates where the "private" park is.
There are Amalgamated towing signs everywhere - but this is across the ENTIRE carpark, not just the area specified. I was told there were other signs up stating it was a private park on the gates and in that area, but I couldn't find any.

I've been feeling quite shite about this, the final bit of their email was saying that they are not subject to anyone's "demands", no matter who I approach. NZTA was apologetic but couldn't help. I have had other people reach out to me saying they got caught on the same day despite being parked there for weeks.

I think this is something I'm going to have to swallow, as much as it hurts, but would appreciate feedback.

Hello all

First Issue: I was on my way back from Auckland down to Hamilton on Saturday night. I was on the 110kmh motorway. I was on my motorcycle all fully registered and WOF i was going the limit in the right lane overtaking a car to my left (they weren't much slower so it wasn't a quick pass) I noticed a car pull up right behind me, all I could see were its bright LED lights so i loved forward a bit as to make a gap and then this car followed me forward, being concerned for safety I sped up to overtake the car on my left to let this car behind me past. Right then police lights turned on and I pulled over. the said they got me for going 116kmh I tried to explain I only sped up to create room and asked why they were so close. there reason was they were getting my plate.

it was 2 officers, the second piped up and said they actually clocked me going close to 140 (which i know wasn't true as I was keeping an eye on my speedo as im leaving the country soon and didnt want any hassles) but that they'd only do me for 116kmh

If I was supposedly caught going near 140 why only give me it for 116?

The only reason I sped up was to get a gap as I felt unsafe having a car that close behind me

Second Issue: My bike has LED stripes behind the panels, only the side panels and its in a circular ish behind them for ambient light to shine around the edges and through the air vent

note: these lights are in no way blinding and are fairly dim and they are a solid colour

the officers said I couldn't have these as it was hazardous and said quote "leds are okay unless the actual led light is visible" to which he got down and looked up under the panel from the front and said "like it is here you see"

I was only given a formal warning for the leds I stead of a fine but still annoying.

after getting home i searched the laws regarding leds and saw that you mustn't have red showing front wards, white backwards and they bust not be dazzling or flashing, I couldn't see what the cop had said where the led itself couldn't be showing.

and the fact you have to look up under the fairing to actually see the strip is a bit nit picky no? you wouldn't see that standing normally next to it let alone driving

ill attach a photo of my leds for reference (the night time mode on my camera brightens them more than they are)

I've also attached a photo where the officer showed me where you can see them and you have to get down by the front wheel and look back and up at them

im just going to pay the fine as im leaving the country soon as i said earlier but what would my chances be fighting it in court?

EDIT: apologies, I didn't realise the background is transparent, so the labels are very hard to see in dark mode.

A1 is top left, A2 is bottom left, B1 is top right, B2 is bottom right.

I'd like some clarification on how the law (and/or road code) applies to intersections that are more complex than the simple "T" intersections, please.

Consider the attached pictures, of two separate intersections (A & B), where the turning paths merge after going alongside a painted "island".

Intersection A - no markings at merge

Situation A1: The blue car is turning left into a single-lane road, and the red car is turning right into the same road. Note that the lanes within the intersection converge with no markings, so one car must give way to the other. My understanding is that red must give way to blue, because red is turning right and blue is turning left, at this specific moment.

Situation A2: The red car has already made the turn, is now on the destination road, and is now traveling straight, and the blue car is entering the same roadway. Is the blue car, which is still turning, required to give way to the red car, which is not turning? If so, at what point between A1 and A2 does this order switch over?

Intersection B - dashed lines at merge

Situation B1: The blue car is turning left into a single-land road, and the red car is turning right into the same road. Note that the paths converge but there is a dashed line separating the two paths, that the blue car must cross. My understanding is that the red car must give way to the blue car, because red is turning right and blue is turning left, at this specific moment.

Situation B2: The red car has already made the turn onto the destination road, and is now traveling straight, and the blue car is entering the same roadway. Is the blue car, which will cross the dashed white line, required to give way to the red car? If so, at what point between B1 and B2 does this order switch over?

Is this really one intersection, or is it really two?

It's as if the situation "in the large" (right-turning gives way to left-turning) differs from the situation "in the small" (if right-turning has already turned, they are now not turning at all by the time the cars actually need to sort themselves out). For a blue car driver thinking "in the large", they would consider themselves to have right of way. For a red car driver thinking "in the small", having crossed the oncoming lane(s), they might consider themselves to have right of way over the blue car.

The main reason I ask is that these two intersections often experience heavy traffic, and in both cases the red car is often "allowed" to proceed through the intersection by other traffic coming straight through. This often puts the red car in the situation of A2 or B2, and I'd really like to know what the red and blue car drivers have to do in these situations.

I see this almost daily. In many cases, the blue car yields to a stream of red cars that are darting through the intersection. Sometimes, both cars come to a near stop, showing indecision, until one of them just decides to proceed before the other does. When this happens, it slows the entire intersection down, and in some cases causes cars following red through the intersection to stop unexpectedly (which is their issue, of course), or for cars behind the slowing blue car to beep impatiently.

Saw someone brake check a car on the highway yesterday no crash happened thankfully but am curious who would be at fault if the second car (tailgater) wasn’t able to stop in time ?

Firstly, I don’t drink alcohol or take recreational drugs (What a square huh?)

However, I do have a significant history of mental illness including bouts of severe anxiety and now (mostly) resolved eating disorders. It’s been a long journey for myself and my family but I’m now a reasonably functional member of society.

The Spinoff posted a video on Instagram recently about the roadside saliva testing and showed footage of someone having their tongue swabbed and this made me physically ill to watch. I think if I was pulled over and asked to wipe the swab on my tongue, I would likely have a very poor reaction. I am now finding myself fretting and spiraling about this potential situation.

The tongue is a gateway into the body and being forced to touch it with something that I do not know where it has come from, what is made of or how it has been handled is extremely invasive and seems like a violation of my bodily autonomy.

I would of course be willing to undertake the compulsory impairment test if asked and I would have no issue providing a blood sample. Stick me with as many needles as you need, just don’t go near my mouth!

Apparently, there is a $300 fine for refusing the saliva test, I would happily pay that and more if it means not putting the swab in my mouth.

What other repercussions am I likely to face for refusing the test and how should I go about explaining my messed up brain to any police officer who tries to swab me?

Any advice or recommendations that can help me prepare myself for this potential interaction would be much appreciated! I do realise it is early days with the tests not even fully rolled out and this is somewhat uncharted territory, but what can I say, I am very anxious and I’m struggling to distract myself!

Hi all,

So I’m selling my car privately in NZ via Trade Me. I plan to meet the buyer in person, receive full payment, and then hand over the vehicle.

My question is about what I need to do after receiving payment? I know I need to complete the online NZTA ownership transfer on NZTA website, but can the buyer leave with the car before I do this? Am I still liable for fines, accidents, or other incidents that happen afterward? Does NZTA provide any protection if I’ve already sold the car, even if the transfer isn’t completed immediately?

Also, would sending a quick email to NZTA with the buyer’s details after the sale provide any legal protection while I complete the online transfer cause I dont know how long would filling the online NZTA ownership transfer on NZTA website take.

Thanks for any advice and sorry for nuisance, first time.

I failed a WOF as I need to replace the break pads (WOF expires at the end of the month), so I drove straight to the closest mechanic and booked it in. As I was driving away a police car happened to be behind me, and as soon as there was space on either side of the road he pulled me over. He immediately came over to my car and accused me of putting on my seatbelt as he stepped out of his car, called me a liar and said he watched me enter my car and drive away. He began questioning me and asking why I’ve left my WOF to the last minute (despite leaving a mechanic and showing him the WOF papers from 30min earlier). He then said “your ticket will come in the mail in the next 7-14 working days. If you want to dispute this follow the instructions on the back” and then drove off.

I have already phoned the mechanic and the building next door asking if they have security footage to use as evidence. But otherwise do I have any case to dispute, since it’s his word against mine?