Home /
News /
New Zealand
When a speeding notice goes wrong!
-Sep-23-2026-02-45-33-4505-AM.jpg?width=740&height=400&name=OPINION%20(2)-Sep-23-2026-02-45-33-4505-AM.jpg)
September 23 2026
A speeding infringement may appear straightforward—but what happens when the details recorded on the notice do not match the evidence?
A New Zealand barrister and solicitor is urging motorists to carefully check infringement notices rather than automatically paying them, after successfully challenging a speeding infringement that Police subsequently withdrew.
The lawyer, Manoj Shukla, said he was issued speeding infringement notice PV8606349, which he decided to challenge after identifying what he considered several inconsistencies in the notice and supporting evidence.
Following his request for information under the Official Information Act, he reviewed the material provided by Police and raised concerns about the accuracy of the recorded details.
According to Shukla, the discrepancies included the time of the alleged offence, which he said did not correspond with the officer’s shift log or the lighting conditions visible in the enforcement photograph.
He also questioned the radar certification, arguing that the certificate provided did not appear to correspond with the antenna actually used to obtain the speed reading.
A further issue concerned the recorded speed. Shukla said the enforcement image appeared to indicate a speed of 94 km/h, rather than the 96 km/h recorded in the infringement notice, potentially placing the alleged offence in a different infringement category.
New Zealand Police subsequently confirmed that the infringement would be withdrawn. The demerit points were waived and a refund of the infringement fee paid under protest was approved.
For Shukla, the outcome goes beyond his individual case.
“As a young lawyer, I found it concerning that these issues were only uncovered because I took the time to request and analyse the underlying evidence,” he said.
He believes the incident highlights the importance of ensuring that enforcement notices are accurate and supported by properly documented evidence.
Many motorists, he argues, may simply pay an infringement notice without examining the underlying records or knowing what information they are entitled to request.
The case therefore raises a broader public-interest question: how many inaccuracies in infringement notices remain undiscovered simply because they are never challenged?
Shukla is not suggesting that motorists should disregard legitimate infringement notices. Rather, his experience serves as a reminder that citizens should check the particulars of a notice and understand their rights when they believe something has been recorded incorrectly.
For information on speeding infringement fees, motorists can also refer directly to the New Zealand Police website: (https://www.police.govt.nz/faq/what-are-fees-speeding)
The message from this case is simple: read the notice carefully, check the details and, where appropriate, seek the evidence behind it.
In this instance, scrutiny led to the withdrawal of the infringement—and highlighted why accuracy matters when enforcement powers are exercised. The Indian News has records of all the original correspondence between the Police and the complainant.
A speeding infringement may appear straightforward—but what happens when the details recorded on the notice do not match the evidence?
A New Zealand barrister and solicitor is urging motorists to carefully check infringement notices rather than automatically paying them, after successfully...
A speeding infringement may appear straightforward—but what happens when the details recorded on the notice do not match the evidence?
A New Zealand barrister and solicitor is urging motorists to carefully check infringement notices rather than automatically paying them, after successfully challenging a speeding infringement that Police subsequently withdrew.
The lawyer, Manoj Shukla, said he was issued speeding infringement notice PV8606349, which he decided to challenge after identifying what he considered several inconsistencies in the notice and supporting evidence.
Following his request for information under the Official Information Act, he reviewed the material provided by Police and raised concerns about the accuracy of the recorded details.
According to Shukla, the discrepancies included the time of the alleged offence, which he said did not correspond with the officer’s shift log or the lighting conditions visible in the enforcement photograph.
He also questioned the radar certification, arguing that the certificate provided did not appear to correspond with the antenna actually used to obtain the speed reading.
A further issue concerned the recorded speed. Shukla said the enforcement image appeared to indicate a speed of 94 km/h, rather than the 96 km/h recorded in the infringement notice, potentially placing the alleged offence in a different infringement category.
New Zealand Police subsequently confirmed that the infringement would be withdrawn. The demerit points were waived and a refund of the infringement fee paid under protest was approved.
For Shukla, the outcome goes beyond his individual case.
“As a young lawyer, I found it concerning that these issues were only uncovered because I took the time to request and analyse the underlying evidence,” he said.
He believes the incident highlights the importance of ensuring that enforcement notices are accurate and supported by properly documented evidence.
Many motorists, he argues, may simply pay an infringement notice without examining the underlying records or knowing what information they are entitled to request.
The case therefore raises a broader public-interest question: how many inaccuracies in infringement notices remain undiscovered simply because they are never challenged?
Shukla is not suggesting that motorists should disregard legitimate infringement notices. Rather, his experience serves as a reminder that citizens should check the particulars of a notice and understand their rights when they believe something has been recorded incorrectly.
For information on speeding infringement fees, motorists can also refer directly to the New Zealand Police website: (https://www.police.govt.nz/faq/what-are-fees-speeding)
The message from this case is simple: read the notice carefully, check the details and, where appropriate, seek the evidence behind it.
In this instance, scrutiny led to the withdrawal of the infringement—and highlighted why accuracy matters when enforcement powers are exercised. The Indian News has records of all the original correspondence between the Police and the complainant.
Related Posts
ISSUE
Leave a Comment