A Brisbane barrister who has written a
paper on the legality of aftermarket motorcycle exhausts has urged all
riders to challenge exhaust noise emissions fines, saying police will
get the message and stop issuing them.
Levente Jurth wrote his paper in January
2016 and is now representing a group of riders caught in a recent blitz
on motorcycle exhaust noise on Mt Tamborine.
“Prior to publishing my paper, the police
deemed any motorcycle exhaust modification as illegal. My paper has had
the benefit that police now appear to accept that aftermarket exhausts
are legal and they also give the 5dB tolerance required by the
regulations,” says Levente who rides an Aprilia Tuono 1100.
While that is a welcome start, Levente says it does not go far enough.
“The applicable regulations, standards
and testing procedures contain dozens of requirements, each of which the
police need to satisfy before a roadside noise emissions test is valid
and capable of securing a conviction for an offence,” he says.
“In most instances, it is to be doubted
whether the police are even capable of complying with some of those
requirements at a roadside test”.
Levente has many questions about the vagaries and contradictions in the motorcycle exhaust noise laws. Issues raised include:
- Why are there different arbitrary noise levels for different bikes? For example, an Aprilia Tuono 1100 is certified at 107dB plus the 5dB allowance (some Ducati’s are even higher), whereas many other bikes are certified at well below 90dB – given a 10dB increase is twice the volume, why is one bike lawfully permitted to be four times louder than another bike?
- How can roadworthy certificates be issued without requiring a noise emissions test, but a rider can be fined for riding a bike that has a current roadworthy certificate?
- In the absence of an authorised testing facility, how can riders who are genuinely trying to comply and do the right thing know how loud their exhaust is?
- Police officers have no training or expertise in acoustics or sound engineering. They are manifestly unqualified to conduct noise tests that require compliance with technical regulations and standards.
- In a practical sense, how are riders supposed to understand and comply with complex and contradictory regulations and standards where even experts in the field debate their true meaning and proper application?
“Once these matters are exposed – whether
during the course of a court case, or otherwise – it is hoped that the
long-term outcome will be meaningful reform leading to uniform
regulations that are clear, capable of being complied with and apply to
everyone equally”, he says.
Comical video
A video supplied by a rider whose bike
was recently noise tested shows the difficulty of the officer trying to
rev the throttle to the required rpm while checking the noise meter in
his other hand.
Levente has seen the video and says “it’s comical”.
“He’s not doing much right, but it’s not
really his fault. It’s practically impossible for him to do everything
required of him correctly, and to do so simultaneously”.
He encouraged anyone who is stopped for
an exhaust noise test to shoot a video of the testing to ensure police
comply with requirements.
He says it may be handy evidence if they later challenge any fine.
“You are allowed to video even though police may tell people not to,” he says.
We asked police for advice on videoing
them and they said there is no reason the public cannot film police,
just as the media are allowed to film them in a public place.
Police can ask you to stop filming, but
you don’t have to acquiesce unless they give a lawful direction for good
reason, such as the person is a safety risk (filming in the middle of
the road) or, for example, they are filming a minor, a witness or a
suspect.
“Therefore, if you tell the police
officer that you are filming because it will be evidence of his or her
conduct and procedures that will be used in court should any charge be
proffered, then the ambit of any ‘lawful direction for good reason’
would have to overcome that,” Levente says.
“It follows that if anyone filming a
police officer undertaking a noise test is asked to stop filming, the
person should tell the police officer that they are filming because it
will be evidence of his or her conduct and procedures that will be used
in court should any charge be proffered, and politely but firmly request
the police officer withdraw the direction to stop filming with that in
mind.
“If the word on the street is that
everyone who gets a fine should challenge it, and that starts to occur,
then I believe the police will give up on these meaningless roadside
stings, which as we all know are just revenue raising, and address the
issue properly and sensibly – which starts with an overhaul of the
regulations and the standards.”
Amnesty-free noise checks
As many riders may be genuinely unaware
that their bike’s noise level is not legal there has been a call testing
facilities to be provided with an amnesty for those who do not comply.
Similar compliance testing facilities are periodically offered by Transport and Main Roads for caravan and truck drivers.
It is believed SEQ police have only three
noise meters and a handful of staff who have been trained in their
calibration and use.
While chances are slim that you could be
stopped and your bike checked, riders who want to ensure they comply
have virtually no opportunity to officially check their exhaust noise
level.
MBW footnote
It should be noted that Levente
is not soliciting for more work. He actually suggests fined riders
approach specialist solicitors who handle traffic matters.
