“Suddenly” snow falling at the end of December paralyzed traffic, road machinery could not cope with yet another “phenomenal” snowfall - in general, the picture is usual for this time. Having stood in one place for about twenty minutes, Anton did not find anything better than to go on the tram tracks and at least somehow move to the center. Fortunately, such a maneuver is permitted by the rules, and trams do not seem to be visible - they are in traffic jams somewhere further. In addition, the KIA-Sporting all-wheel drive made it possible to feel relatively calm on slippery rails. The joy was short-lived. Not having driven a hundred meters, Anton buried himself in a stalled "penny" - she tried in vain to move off, polishing ice-covered rails with summer rubber. Anton could no longer return to the carriageway (a high curb prevented him), so he simply drove the Zhiguli on the left along the oncoming tracks and moved on. And there they were waiting for him! The inspector of the traffic police cheerfully ordered Anton and several other drivers who followed him to stop and began to take turns inviting him into his car. So our hero was in the passenger seat of a white and blue BMW.
“We are breaking …” the overweight inspector was clearly not in the mood.
- I'm not out of malice …
- And it doesn’t matter, for good or evil. Now we will select the rights, and there let the court understand the reasons.
- What are the rights to select?
- As for what - for going to the oncoming traffic!
“So these are tram tracks!”
- And it doesn’t matter - the oncoming lane is all the same!
Suddenly, the inspector hesitated, started to call someone on his cell phone, and then said: you’ll go to a parsing group, but it still won’t save - they will take away the rights for at least six months. After that, he drew up a protocol, muttering at the same time something about the ongoing operation "Gazelle", and then "I have to mess with all sorts of things …"
Anton realized that he alone couldn’t cope here, and turned to the “Driving Lawyers”.
"MEETING" AS A WAY … TO EARN
How much has already been written about going to the oncoming lane! In “Behind the Wheel” over the past three years, a dozen articles have been published. What should be considered as departure and what is not, is told, explained and illustrated. In general, lawyers and journalists are paying attention to this topic. Only … official bodies remain aside. Official explanations have not yet been published on how to nevertheless qualify offenses related to traveling "to the side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic, in cases where this is prohibited by the Rules of the Road." But in real life, this is done according to the principle of "how God will put a soul on his soul." So this time we had to face a rather strange interpretation of the seemingly obvious requirement of the law.
Even before Anton went to the parsing group, we made a complaint about the actions of the inspector who delayed the driver’s license. In fact, the time limit for appealing against the actions of officials is three months, but we were interested in the complaint getting to the traffic police department before Anton was given a subpoena. We hoped that we would be able to do without trials as soon as possible. Anton even suggested going to the traffic police without a defender - why conflict?
I will explain what we proceeded from. Any violation must be qualified, that is, give a legal assessment of the actions of the violator. Let me remind you what the third part of Article 12.15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation sounds: “exit on the side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic, in cases where this is prohibited by the Rules of the road”. One of the signs of this offense is the presence of a carriageway on which the exit is made. The carriageway, in accordance with the same Rules (paragraph 1.2), is a “road element designed for the movement of trackless vehicles”. Consequently, when leaving on tram tracks, the driver does not leave on the carriageway. So, in his actions, speaking the legal language, there are no signs of an administrative offense under article 12.15 part 3. It is clear that there can be no question of any deprivation of the right to control! As a result, such a complaint was sent on behalf of K.
"To the commander of the OPS of Moscow
Complaint against the actions of the inspector of the traffic police of Moscow
12/21. 2004, about 11 hours 23 minutes, inspector of the Moscow City Road Traffic Police, Novikov V.G. It was drawn up an administrative offense 77 AB No. *******. At the same time, the inspector seized my driver’s license.
As stated in the protocol: “K.'s driver, driving the aforementioned car, followed Volokolamskoe sh. from st. Vodnikov towards st. "Gabrichevsky on tram tracks and made a trip to the tram tracks on the opposite direction." At the same time, the inspector accused me of violating the requirements of paragraph 9.6 of the Rules of the Road and qualified the offense under part three of Article 12.15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. In connection with this, my driver's license was seized. These actions of the inspector are illegal for the following reasons:
In accordance with part 3 of Article 12.15 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the composition of an administrative offense is leaving on the side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic, in cases where this is prohibited by the Rules of the road. The necessary basis for holding the driver liable for this train is a trip to the side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic, when such a trip is expressly prohibited by the Rules of the Road (hereinafter - SDA). The traffic rules contain six direct prohibitions of exit on the opposite side of the carriageway (hereinafter I have cited all these points - S.V.).
Obviously, “going onto the oncoming tram tracks” is not prohibited by the rules of the road and as provided for in the third part of Article 12.15 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation leaving on the “side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic”.
It should also be noted that the concept of “carriageway” is defined by paragraph 1.2 of the Rules of the road as “an element of the road intended for the movement of trackless vehicles”. In this regard, tram tracks are not a carriageway. And going on the opposite direction tram tracks is not forbidden by the Rules of the Road leaving on “the side of the carriageway intended for oncoming traffic”. Moreover, the current legislation does not provide for liability for going on the opposite direction of tram tracks. In the absence of administrative responsibility for any violation of the Rules, drawing up a protocol on an administrative offense is illegal.
In accordance with the foregoing, I ask you to recognize the actions of the inspector of the traffic police of Moscow, who drew up the protocol on administrative offense 77 AB No. *******, as unlawful; to terminate the administrative case on the grounds provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 24.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, that is, due to the absence of an administrative offense in my actions. ”
(I deliberately repeat myself and cite the text of the complaint almost completely, because similar ones have to be compiled almost daily; maybe some of our readers will need it as a model.)
LET'S NOT LET!
At the appointed time, Anton came to the parsing group. The young inspector carefully read the complaint, then called two more colleagues and the three of them decided that only the court would figure it out. And handed the summons. Anton had no choice but to submit a complaint to the office for transmission to the boss. True, the attempt failed: the entrance to the office valiantly defended the duty officer; he categorically refused to take paper or miss Anton. Apparently, something very secret was happening there! I had to go to the post office and send a complaint by mail with a notification of delivery.