Couple’s anger over intrusive photo sent with seatbelt fine

A Gold Coast couple are furious after being sent an ‘insensitive’ and ‘disrespectful’ photo alongside a monster fine for what they say was a momentary lapse. FULL DETAILS

A Gold Coast man is furious after being slapped with a $1078 fine after his partner’s arm briefly slipped out of her seatbelt when she reached to pull down a sun visor.

Adding insult to injury, one of two photos sent with the fine to Richard Arnold by the state government appears to show partner Anh Nyugen’s underwear.

Ms Nyugen, who is 152cm tall, was wearing a skirt at the time the photo was taken and had a foot against the dashboard as she reached for the sun visor.

Mr Arnold, who is retired and on a fixed income, said he was astonished that he could be fined over a momentary lapse by a passenger which he believed would have lasted no more than two or three seconds.

“I don’t think it’s reasonable,” he said. “If you’re driving your car you can’t be checking your passengers all the time to see if their seatbelt is correctly adjusted.

“Of course you should ensure that they have one on. But you can’t check it every second when you’re driving a car.”

Anh Nyugen seen pulling down a visor in a photo that accompanied the fine sent to partner Richard Arnold. Picture: Glenn Hampson.

The Infringement Notice sent to Mr Arnold showed that the photo was taken by fixed cameras on the M1 in Coomera at 5.21pm on December 19.

Mr Arnold said the sun would have been low in the sky at that time and the accompanying photo clearly shows Ms Nyugen – who told the Bulletin she always wears a seatbelt – was pulling down the visor in the Mitsubishi Triton ute.

Ms Nyugen demonstrates how her arm briefly slipped away from her seatbelt as she reached for the sun visor. Picture: Glenn Hampson.

Mr Arnold said he had chosen to fight the fine in court, despite fearing he would be hit with further costs he could ill afford.

“There’s no accounting for your income or anything,” Mr Arnold said. “That (the $1078 fine) is a significant sum for me.

“I’m retired, I’ve a fixed income pension. My industry collapsed because of the pandemic. I was in the aviation business and was forced into early retirement.

“There’s a cost of living crisis. Everybody’s savings have been wrecked. We’ve got inflation.

“... It was probably only two or three seconds where you reach up and adjust the visor. And the fine is $1078. It’s ridiculous.”

Richard Arnold got a $1078 fine when partner Anh Nyugen briefly slipped her seatbelt under her arm as she adjusted a sun visor. Picture Glenn Hampson

Mr Arnold said the couple were also outraged by the photo appearing to show Ms Nyugen’s underwear, which he said had caused her distress.

He said he believed the government should apologise for the “indecent photograph”, which the Bulletin has chosen not to publish.

“You don’t expect to be sent pictures of your wife’s underwear, I have to say,” he said.

“It’s actually illegal I think to photograph up a skirt.

“Covert photographic surveillance should not be used in such an insensitive and disrespectful manner.”

A Department of Transport and Main Roads spokesperson said photographs captured by mobile phone and seatbelt cameras are “securely encrypted and stored” and used “only for enforcement purposes”.

“Mobile phone and seatbelt cameras take images of each vehicle travelling in the lane of traffic that the camera is monitoring. The images are then filtered by Artificial Intelligence software which detects if there was possible illegal use of a mobile phone by the driver or failure to correctly wear a seatbelt by the driver or front seat passenger,” the spokesperson said.

“These fines are issued to the registered operator of the vehicle by Queensland Revenue Office (QRO).

“If an offence is not detected, the images are excluded from any further action and are deleted by the system. If a possible offence is detected, the images are reviewed by an authorised officer within QRO to determine whether to issue an infringement.

“Images are used only for enforcement purposes and are securely encrypted and stored under current legislative requirements. Only images taken that may show an offence are viewed and retained by QRO.”

The spokesperson added that when fines are issued, “images are not altered or redacted before they are included on the infringement notice which is issued only to the registered operator of the motor vehicle, to protect privacy.”

Figures obtained by the Bulletin showed 25,867 people were issued with fines for seatbelt offences recorded on special cameras in the 12 months to October 31 – an average of 70 a day.

Of those the majority were for seatbelt offences committed by passengers rather than drivers.

Follow @keithjwoods

Originally published as Couple’s anger over intrusive photo sent with seatbelt fine