[Timpo]

So we know we have a right to dispute your traffic violation ticket.

Apparently, every time someone disputes a violation ticket, it will cost them $1,000 or more just because legal fee is that expensive. (Source: An ex-police Sergent tells how and why you should fight ALL speeding fines | The Free Thought Project (http://thefreethoughtproject.com/ex-police-sergent-tells-fight-speeding-fines/))

14% of violation tickets in BC are disputed. (Source: Changes to traffic dispute process in B.C. under way - British Columbia - CBC News (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/changes-to-traffic-dispute-process-in-b-c-under-way-1.3025036))

So let's say the average price of violation tickets that are issued in BC is $150.

100%/14%=7.14

Which makes it $1071 (7.14x$150) for the breakeven point of violation ticket revenue. So if someone disputes the ticket, it better cost them less than $1071 so that they can keep some change.

But ICBC always report multi-million $ revenue for violation ticket every year, how is that possible?

When you pay for the ticket, ICBC takes the money.
If you dispute the ticket, who is paying for it? Provincial or Federal govenment? BC Court registry? Ministry of Justice? :confused: who??
I guess the police departments will be paying officers wage, so is it like a split deal or what?
Because ICBC seems like a sole winner in this situation.

[donjalapeno]

Because ICBC seems like a sole winner in this situation.

ICBC is a sole winner in EVERY situation. Loss is not in their financial dictionary.

[flagella]

I'm trying to understand your calculation.

[SumAznGuy]

Courts are provincial, so Crusty Clark pays for it, which means we the tax paying people in BC pay for it.

[Mike.L]

ICBC gets money for speeding tickets? I'm pretty sure the police department gets that.

It still costs money to have a judge, court admininstraters, etc. to even physically be there. So, even if nobody is disputing, it still costs them money.

[meme405]

I'm trying to understand your calculation.

So am I... :crazy2:

[inv4zn]

Taking all your stats, this should be the calculation:

Let's say 10,000 tickets are issued:
14% of them (1,400) are disputed, and at a cost of $1000 per dispute, it costs someone 1.4 million in legal fees.
86% of them (8,600) are paid, and at an average of $150 a ticket, it generates someone 1.29 million in income from fines.

So now it looks like we're losing money by issuing tickets. But wait! Not all disputes are won, and they have to pay anyway. Let's assume that 50% of disputes are lost. So now there's an additional $105K to the income pool, more or less balancing the two. And then, if you apply real-world data - actual % disputed, actual $ disputed vs $ paid, etc., that's where the surplus comes from.

And to answer your original question, the costs for court fees are paid by taxpayers through tax, insurance, etc.

The income from tickets go to ICBC, yes, but they're split to pay for various things. I can't find the local equivalent, but here's an article for Minnesota's split scheme.
Good Question: Where Does Traffic Ticket Money Go? « CBS Minnesota (http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/06/27/good-question-where-does-traffic-ticket-money-go/)

[Soundy]

Taking all your stats, this should be the calculation:

Let's say 10,000 tickets are issued:
14% of them (1,400) are disputed, and at a cost of $1000 per dispute, it costs someone 1.4 million in legal fees.
86% of them (8,600) are paid, and at an average of $150 a ticket, it generates someone 1.29 million in income from fines.
Something tells me that $150 figure is a bit low, considering even the cheapest speeding ticket is, what, $138 these days? Electronic device tickets are $167, seatbelts are $167... I suspect the average is well more than $150.

Don't forget the penalty points as well, which can add up fast if you have multiple offenses.

[meme405]

Taking all your stats, this should be the calculation:

Let's say 10,000 tickets are issued:
14% of them (1,400) are disputed, and at a cost of $1000 per dispute, it costs someone 1.4 million in legal fees.
86% of them (8,600) are paid, and at an average of $150 a ticket, it generates someone 1.29 million in income from fines.

So now it looks like we're losing money by issuing tickets. But wait! Not all disputes are won, and they have to pay anyway. Let's assume that 50% of disputes are lost. So now there's an additional $105K to the income pool, more or less balancing the two. And then, if you apply real-world data - actual % disputed, actual $ disputed vs $ paid, etc., that's where the surplus comes from.

And to answer your original question, the costs for court fees are paid by taxpayers through tax, insurance, etc.

The income from tickets go to ICBC, yes, but they're split to pay for various things. I can't find the local equivalent, but here's an article for Minnesota's split scheme.
Good Question: Where Does Traffic Ticket Money Go? « CBS Minnesota (http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/06/27/good-question-where-does-traffic-ticket-money-go/)

Your 105K should actually by 122500. Because when you dispute and lose you have to pay an extra 25 bucks.

I agree with timpo in this though. The idea for traffic tickets should not be just to break even on the legal costs, thats retarded. The truth is that if you dispute and lose the fee should be much fucking higher. This takes away the incentive of people just disputing every damn ticket they get even if it's a ticket they completely deserve.

[Timpo]

Something tells me that $150 figure is a bit low, considering even the cheapest speeding ticket is, what, $138 these days? Electronic device tickets are $167, seatbelts are $167... I suspect the average is well more than $150.

Don't forget the penalty points as well, which can add up fast if you have multiple offenses.
I saw bunch of $81 and $109 so I kinda assumed that the average would be $150.
Perhaps you're right, but how much the average should be?
Fines & points for B.C. traffic offences (http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/tickets/Pages/fines-points-offences.aspx)

[Soundy]

The average of all POSSIBLE fines may be around $150, but you have to factor how many of each kind are issued. 1000 of the cheapest speeding tickets and 1000 texting tickets will average out to about 150 each, but if you have 1000 speeding tickets and 2000 texting tickets, the average of all those becomes ((138 * 1000) + (167 * 2000)) /3000 = $157.33 average per ticket.

If the cops aren't handing out a lot of $81 tickets, that doesn't really affect the average much.

Your numbers also don't factor in multiple violations on one VT. Get a speeding, a texting, and a seatbelt charge all on one ticket, it's still the same thousand bucks to dispute that, but if you lose, or don't dispute, that's $472 in the coffers.

[inv4zn]

Something tells me that $150 figure is a bit low, considering even the cheapest speeding ticket is, what, $138 these days? Electronic device tickets are $167, seatbelts are $167... I suspect the average is well more than $150.

Don't forget the penalty points as well, which can add up fast if you have multiple offenses.

I just used the figure Timpo gave...and your latest post does put a more real world perspective on it as well.

The penalty points, or driver premiums or whatever they call it, do go to ICBC i believe.

Your 105K should actually by 122500. Because when you dispute and lose you have to pay an extra 25 bucks.

I agree with timpo in this though. The idea for traffic tickets should not be just to break even on the legal costs, thats retarded. The truth is that if you dispute and lose the fee should be much fucking higher. This takes away the incentive of people just disputing every damn ticket they get even if it's a ticket they completely deserve.

I didn't know they had that "fine". But I agree - it should be like an extra 250.

[Timpo]

I'm trying to understand your calculation.
So am I... :crazy2:

The way I did my calculation is this..

We have 14% of tickets disputed in BC. To determine the breakeven point, I just did 100%(all tickets issued) devided by 14%(tickets disputed)
100%/14%=7.14, which would be 7.14x$150=$1071
$150 was my guess for average ticket price. So $150 was not a fact, it was a number that I pulled out of my head.

So for example, if we have 50% disputed ticket, I would have done 100% divided by 50% (100%/50%=2) which makes it $150x2=$300(breakeven point). Which in this case, the court fee can not be more than $300 in order for them to make profit.

[Soundy]

The way I did my calculation is this..

We have 14% of tickets disputed in BC. To determine the breakeven point, I just did 100%(all tickets issued) devided by 14%(tickets disputed)
100%/14%=7.14, which would be 7.14x$150=$1071
$150 was my guess for average ticket price. So $150 was not a fact, it was a number that I pulled out of my head.

So for example, if we have 50% disputed ticket, I would have done 100% divided by 50% (100%/50%=2) which makes it $150x2=$300(breakeven point). Which in this case, the court fee can not be more than $300 in order for them to make profit.

That makes zero sense. You're basically coming up with, the more tickets are disputed, the less it costs the system. By this logic, all tickets should be disputed because then the legal system is free.

[Timpo]

That makes zero sense. You're basically coming up with, the more tickets are disputed, the less it costs the system. By this logic, all tickets should be disputed because then the legal system is free.

No, what I meant in that calculation was, if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would only have $300 for them play with. (assuming average ticket price is $150)

For example, if it's gonna cost them $1,000 to let someone dispute their ticket, and if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would have $700 loss.
$300(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= -$700

But if 14% of tickets are disputed, they would still make $71
$1071(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $71

Just as an example, if 1% of tickets are disputed, and if average ticket price is $150, the calculation would be..
$15,000(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $14,000

[Reeyal]

But ICBC always report multi-million $ revenue for violation ticket every year, how is that possible?



That is revenue. You need to factor in costs. Net income or profit is revenue minus cost.

For example, if a company reports 10 billion in revenue, but their costs are 12 billion, then they would run a 2 billion lost.

No, what I meant in that calculation was, if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would only have $300 for them play with. (assuming average ticket price is $150)

For example, if it's gonna cost them $1,000 to let someone dispute their ticket, and if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would have $700 loss.
$300(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= -$700

But if 14% of tickets are disputed, they would still make $71
$1071(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $71

Just as an example, if 1% of tickets are disputed, and if average ticket price is $150, the calculation would be..
$15,000(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $14,000

I don't think your calculations workout that way. It costs the legal system $1,000 for each dispute, not $1,000 total for the 14%.

inv4zn calculations are correct.

[Soundy]

No, what I meant in that calculation was, if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would only have $300 for them play with. (assuming average ticket price is $150)

For example, if it's gonna cost them $1,000 to let someone dispute their ticket, and if 50% of tickets are disputed, they would have $700 loss.
$300(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= -$700

But if 14% of tickets are disputed, they would still make $71
$1071(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $71

Just as an example, if 1% of tickets are disputed, and if average ticket price is $150, the calculation would be..
$15,000(money made by tickets)-$1,000(legal fee)= $14,000

Bro, do you even math?

[The_AK]

prisoners dilemma would dictate that society as a whole pays for the cost therefore always dispute even though its in society's best interest to just pay the damn fine

[underscore]

Let's assume that 50% of disputes are lost.

Given how few people disputing tickets are disputing them for a legitimate reason, I have a feeling that number is even higher in actuality.

[godwin]

It wont' be a fine, but a surcharge, we can call it the "stupid idiot surcharge". $250 is too low, you have to factor in court time, judge time and officer time.


I didn't know they had that "fine". But I agree - it should be like an extra 250.