Police (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2018

The regulation introduces several key concepts that structure how costs are calculated and who bears them. First, the distinction between a “fee” and a “charge” is important, though not always clearly delineated. Fees in Schedule 1 are fixed dollar amounts for stand alone administrative services that any member of the public or organisation can request, such as a national criminal history check ($64.90) or a copy of a traffic infringement notice record ($16.50). These fees are payable regardless of whether the service is provided, and the Commissioner may reduce, waive or refund them. Charges in Schedule 2, by contrast, apply only to major events where the promoter or organiser requests police services. These are calculated on a time basis using the “planning rate” ($67.10 per hour plus $23.10 general overhead, totalling $90.20 per hour) and the “attendance rate” ($121.00 per hour plus $23.10 general overhead, totalling $144.10 per hour). The “attendance rate” covers the time police officers spend actually at the event providing services; the “planning rate” covers preparatory work such as operational planning and risk assessment. For air support, separate overhead rates apply: $3,440.80 per hour for a helicopter and $3,093.00 per hour for a fixed wing aircraft, with no explicit additional personnel cost component in the regulation. The “major event” concept itself is not defined in the regulations but is defined in section 39E of the Police Act 1892. Regulation 5 exempts three events from that Part, meaning police services for those events are not charged under this regime. However, the regulation does not specify what alternative charging arrangement applies to exempt events (if any). Another core concept is the “traffic infringement notice record”, which refers to the department’s record of infringement notices served under the Road Traffic (Administration) 2008 Part 5. This concept is used only to set the fee for providing a copy. The “general overhead expenses rate” of $23.10 per hour is added to both planning and attendance rates, reflecting indirect costs such as administration, equipment and facilities. The regulation explicitly treats amounts as GST inclusive except for item 8 (replacement prosecution documents at $94.00 per hour), which means the fee payer cannot claim input tax credits on most charges unless they are registered for GST and treat the supply as taxable. The six minute billing increment is a notable feature: one tenth of the hourly rate per six minutes. This allows granular billing but could result in rounding anomalies if time is recorded in larger blocks. The rates are updated annually by amendment regulations published on 1 July each year, with the compilation table showing consistent indexation from 2018 through 2025.

The regulations directly affect three broad categories of persons and entities. First, promoters and organisers of major events in Western Australia. Any person or organisation that requests police services for an event that falls within the definition of “major event” under Part IVB of the Police Act must pay planning and attendance charges calculated on the time of officers deployed, plus air support overheads if applicable. This includes commercial event organisers, sporting bodies, music festival promoters, and community groups hosting large scale gatherings. However, the three exempt events (Perth Royal Show, Pride Parade, Pride Fair Day) are specifically excluded, so those organisers do not face charges. The regulation does not specify criteria for exemption beyond these three, meaning any other event organiser is liable. The charging regime creates a direct financial cost for event organisers, which may affect decisions about event timing, scale, and whether to request police presence. For events where police attendance is mandatory (e.g., due to public safety requirements), the organiser may have no choice but to pay. Second, individuals and organisations that request specific administrative police services. Any person can request a copy of their traffic infringement notice record ($16.50), a national criminal history record check ($64.90 standard, $37.40 for public sector bodies, $17.60 for volunteer organisations), an authorised copy of a photograph ($11.00), or incident information relating to a road accident ($55.00 for those involved or for the Insurance Commission). Volunteer organisations receive a discount on criminal history checks, reflecting the policy aim of reducing costs for the non profit sector. Third, the Insurance Commission of Western Australia is specifically mentioned as a recipient of incident information at the same $55.00 fee as individuals. Fourth, parties requiring replacement prosecution documents (e.g., defendants who lose their original paperwork) must pay $94.00 per hour for replacement statements of material facts or additional disclosure copies. Fifth, any person requiring high risk escorts by the Tactical Response Group pays $169.40 per person per hour. That fee is significantly higher than the general escort rate that might have existed under the repealed regulations, reflecting the specialised nature of the service. The Commissioner of Police and the department are also affected as they must administer the fee collection, maintain time recording systems for major events, and determine waiver applications. The regulation does not prescribe any criteria for waivers, leaving the Commissioner broad discretion. This means that administrative inconsistency is possible: one promoter may receive a full waiver while another paying the same fees does not, with no right of review specified.

The regulations impose specific duties and confer limited rights. The primary duty is on any person who requests a service listed in Schedule 1 to pay the prescribed fee. The promoter or organiser of a major event has a duty to pay the calculated charges for planning and attendance time if police services were requested and provided. If the event is cancelled, the promoter must give the Commissioner written notice “as soon as practicable” and must still pay for planning time incurred before notice was given. The regulation does not define “as soon as practicable” nor does it provide a maximum charge period, so a promoter who cancels late could face a substantial bill for weeks of planning work. The Commissioner has the right to charge in that scenario. The Commissioner also has the right to reduce, waive or refund fees payable under regulation 4, but this discretion is not expressly extended to major event charges under regulation 6. There is no explicit right of review or appeal against the Commissioner’s decision to levy charges or to refuse a waiver. The person requesting a service has a right to receive that service upon payment, but the regulation does not impose a time limit on the department to provide it. For example, a person paying $16.50 for a traffic infringement notice record has no statutory guarantee of turnaround time. The promoter of a major event has no statutory right to negotiate the rates or the number of officers deployed; those decisions rest with the Commissioner, having regard to security requirements. For air support, the promoter may request it, but the Commissioner may agree or decline based on security requirements. If air support is provided, the promoter must pay the high overhead rates. There is no right to opt out of air support charges once the Commissioner agrees. The regulation also creates a right for the department to recover GST on the fees and charges (except item 8), but the promoter has no right to claim input tax credits unless the supply is creditable under the GST Act. The repeal of the 1981 regulations removes any prior rights or duties under that instrument, so the 2018 regime is comprehensive. For volunteer organisations, there is a right to the discounted criminal history check fee if they qualify, but the regulation does not define “volunteer organisation”, leaving that interpretation to the department. This could lead to disputes over whether an entity qualifies.

The regulations themselves do not create any criminal offences or civil penalties for non payment. Instead, enforcement is likely to occur through civil debt recovery or administrative means. If a fee or charge is unpaid, the Commissioner could refuse to provide further services until payment is made, or could refer the debt to the State Debt Recovery Office or pursue court proceedings. For major event charges, the promoter’s obligation arises from the request for police services. The Act under which the regulations are made (Police Act 1892) may contain enforcement provisions, but the regulations do not cross reference them. The only penalty like provision is the cancellation charge itself: a promoter who cancels an event still pays for planning time, which acts as a form of liquidated damages for the resources already committed. The regulation does not specify a penalty for failing to give notice of cancellation within a reasonable time; the Commissioner’s ability to charge for planning time is not capped except by the actual time spent. There is no late payment fee or interest charge specified. This means that for a promoter who delays payment, the Commissioner could only recover the principal amount plus any court ordered costs if the matter went to judgment. This is a relatively lenient enforcement regime compared to that for other statutory fees where penalty units and surcharges are common. However, the absence of a penalty could also reduce the incentive to pay on time. The Commissioner’s broad waiver power under regulation 4(2) means that if non payment is due to hardship, the fee could be reduced or refunded, but that is a discretion, not a right. For replacement prosecution documents (item 8), the $94.00 per hour charge is GST exclusive, meaning if the buyer is not GST registered they effectively pay more when the GST is added. But the regulation does not dictate how GST is collected; that is left to the Tax Office. The regulations do not provide for audit or verification of time records, so a promoter being charged for 100 hours of planning time would have little recourse unless they could prove the time was not actually spent. This creates an information asymmetry risk: the department holds the time records and the promoter bears the cost without a right to inspect. If a promoter disputes the charge, no internal review mechanism is described. The aggrieved party could theoretically seek judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision to levy a charge, but that would require showing error of law or unreasonableness. That is a high threshold.

The regulations sit within a broader legislative framework. They are made under the Police Act 1892, specifically under Part IVB which deals with major events. The definition of “event” in section 39E of that Act is key: it likely includes elements such as public gatherings, ticketed events, and events requiring police resources. Regulation 5 exempts three specific events from that Part, so for those events the charging regime does not apply. For other events, Part IVB and regulation 6 operate together. The regulations also interact with the Road Traffic (Administration) Act 2008, which defines “incident information” in section 4. Schedule 1 item 6 sets fees for providing that information. The same Act Part 5 governs the issue of traffic infringement notices, and the regulations use that Part’s record keeping system as the basis for the traffic infringement notice record fee. The Commonwealth A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999 section 195-1 defines GST, and regulation 8 stipulates that the amounts in the schedules are GST inclusive except item 8. This means that for most services, the provider (the department) is likely not registered for GST or makes input taxed supplies, so the fee payer cannot claim input tax credits. For item 8, the exclusivity suggests the department treats that supply as taxable, so the buyer can claim credits if registered. This is a nuance that affects cost: a business buying replacement prosecution documents will pay GST on top, but can claim it back; an individual cannot. The regulations repeal the Police (Fees) Regulations 1981, so any existing arrangements under the 1981 regime are superseded. There is no grandfathering provision. The regulations may also interact with the Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA) if a person requests information that is also available as a police record. The fee under these regulations may be cheaper or more expensive than the FOI application fee, so a knowledgeable applicant might choose the cheaper route. The regulations do not mention privacy laws, but providing a traffic infringement notice record or criminal history check involves handling personal information, so the Privacy and Responsible Information Sharing Act 2023 (WA) would apply to the department’s handling of that data. The regulations do not override privacy obligations. For major events, the promoter may also need to comply with the Work Health and Safety Act 2020 (WA), the Dangerous Goods Safety Act 2004, and local council approvals. The police charging regime adds a cost layer that may be passed on to ticket purchasers. Finally, the annual amendment regulations are made under the Subordinate Legislation Act 1945 (WA) and are subject to disallowance, but no disallowance has occurred to date given the consistent annual updates.

The regulations were originally made on 12 January 2018 and published in the Gazette. Most provisions commenced on 13 January 2018, the day after publication, except regulations 1 and 2 which commenced immediately on publication. The original instrument set initial fee and charge amounts. Since then, annual amendment regulations have been made each June or July to update the dollar amounts. The compilation table lists ten amendment stages. The 2018 amendment (Police Regulations Amendment (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2018 Part 4) commenced on 1 July 2018, likely the first indexation. A separate 2018 amendment (Police (Fees and Charges) Amendment Regulations 2018) was published on 17 August 2018 and commenced 18 August 2018. This amendment likely adjusted the air support rates or introduced a new provision, as regulation 6 was amended in the Gazette of that date. Subsequent amendments occurred each 1 July from 2019 to 2025, each raising the fees and charges by a small margin. The 2024 amendment (SL 2024/202) commencing 7 October 2024 added the definition of “traffic infringement notice record” to regulation 3. This suggests that before that date, the term was used in Schedule 1 but not defined, creating potential ambiguity. The 2025 amendment (SL 2025/86) commencing 1 July 2025 inserted the headings “Fees” and “Charges for major events” into the schedules. This was a purely editorial change; the substantive amounts were already there but not preceded by descriptive headings. The same amendment updated the fee figures to their current levels. The cumulative effect of these amendments is a steady increase in costs over time, roughly tracking inflation. For example, the planning rate in 2018 was likely lower than the current $67.10. The attendance rate similarly rose. The air support overhead rates have also been adjusted, though the compilation table does not show historical amounts. The repeal of the 1981 regulations was done by regulation 9 of the 2018 instrument. No further repeals have occurred. The regulation has been amended only in procedural or monetary respects; there have been no structural changes such as adding new exempt events or changing the waiver power. The annual indexation pattern means that users must check the latest version each financial year. The compilation notes indicate that the version authorised is as at the last amendment date. The regulations are subject to the standard review cycle under the Subordinate Legislation Act, but no review has been published. The amendment history shows that the government uses a uniform approach across police regulations: the same amendment regulations that amend fee schedules for other police instruments also amend this one, as seen in the numbered parts (e.g., Part 4 of each year’s omnibus amendment).

The compilation table and the regulation text do not reference any litigation. There are no case citations, no savings provisions related to pending appeals, and no indication that the regulations have been challenged in court. Given the relatively modest amounts at stake per transaction (most fees are under $100, and major event charges can be higher but still small relative to event budgets), there may have been no incentive for a test case. The broad waiver power under regulation 4(2) may also reduce the likelihood of disputes escalating to litigation because an aggrieved party can simply apply for a waiver. That said, the lack of published litigation does not mean no disputes have arisen; they may have been resolved internally or through mediation without a reported judgment. If a promoter refused to pay major event charges, the Commissioner could sue for debt in the Magistrates Court. No published decision appears in standard databases. The regulations themselves do not create a statutory cause of action. Any challenge to the amount charged would likely be framed as a judicial review of the Commissioner’s decision to levy the charge, arguing that the time recorded was unreasonable or that the service was not provided. However, the regulation gives the Commissioner substantial discretion (e.g., “may charge” for cancelled events), so a court would apply a Wednesbury standard of unreasonableness. The repealed 1981 regulations were also not the subject of known litigation. The absence of litigation history suggests that the regime is accepted by stakeholders, or that the costs of challenging are higher than the fees themselves. For major event promoters, the charges may be a pass through cost that they accept as part of doing business. If a large event promoter were to challenge, they might argue that the charges are an unconstitutional tax or a fee for a service not requested, but the regulation is clearly linked to a request for service, so that argument would be weak. The duty to pay cancellation charges even for events beyond the promoter’s control (e.g., government ordered cancellation) could be a point of contention, but no case has tested that. Until a court rules on the meaning of “as soon as practicable” or whether the Commissioner’s charge for planning time can be excessive, the law remains untested.

Several features of the regulations can catch out the unwary. The billing unit of six minutes is easily misunderstood. Regulation 6(1)(a) provides one tenth of the planning rate for each six minutes the officer spends. This means 10 six minute increments per hour, so if an officer spends 30 minutes planning, that is five increments, charged at five tenths of the hourly rate. A promoter expecting whole hour billing may be surprised by the granularity, but also by the fact that partial hours are charged, not rounded up. However, if the department rounds up recorded time to the next six minute block, that could be costly: 31 minutes becomes six blocks (36 minutes charged). The regulation does not specify rounding rules, leaving it to departmental practice. The air support overhead rates are deceptively high. A helicopter at $3,440.80 per hour is more than 40 times the attendance rate for a ground officer. If air support is provided for six hours, that is over $20,000 in overhead alone, plus any personnel costs (though the regulation does not explicitly add personnel costs for air support; it only mentions overhead expenses. The regulation is silent on whether air support officer time is also charged at the attendance rate. A promoter could be billed for the helicopter overhead plus the pilot’s time at the attendance rate. The wording of regulation 6(3) says “the amount chargeable for overhead expenses associated with the provision of air support” - it does not say personnel costs are excluded, nor does it repeat the attendance rate formula for aircrew. This ambiguity is a gotcha. Another trap: the cancellation charge applies even if the event is cancelled for reasons outside the promoter’s control, such as a natural disaster or government emergency order. The regulation does not except force majeure. The promoter must still pay for planning time up to the point of notice. There is no cap on how much planning time may have been incurred; if the police spent 500 hours planning a large event, the promoter bears that cost. The definition of “major event” is imported from the Act and could be broader than expected. An event that is not ticketed, or is free, may still be a major event if it meets the Act’s criteria (likely based on size, risk or public interest). Small community events could inadvertently fall within the regime if they request police. The exemption list is fixed at three events; there is no application process for other exemptions. The waiver power under regulation 4(2) applies only to fees, not to major event charges. So a promoter who cannot afford the charge has no explicit right to ask for a reduction; the Commissioner has no stated discretion to reduce major event charges. However, regulation 6(2) gives the Commissioner discretion to agree to provide air support, but not to reduce the rate. If a promoter cannot pay, the Commissioner could simply not provide the officers, but that could leave the event without police coverage and potentially force cancellation. The GST quirk: item 8 (replacement prosecution documents at $94.00 per hour) is GST exclusive. This means the total payable will be $103.40 if the department adds 10% GST. But other items are GST inclusive, so the $16.50 fee includes GST, meaning the taxable value is $15.00. A person who is not GST registered cannot claim the GST component back anyway, but the different treatment creates confusion. Finally, the regulation does not specify any time limit for the department to provide the service after payment. A person could pay for a criminal history check and wait weeks with no statutory service standard.

For promoters and organisers of major events, compliance begins before the event. Contact the Commissioner of Police as early as possible to request police services and negotiate the scope of deployment. Obtain a written agreement that specifies the number of officers, the estimated hours of planning and attendance, and whether air support is requested. The regulation does not require a written contract, but having one will help later when disputing charges. Request itemised time records if possible; the department may not provide them voluntarily, but asking in writing may preserve evidence. Calculate the expected charges using the rates in Schedule 2: planning rate ($67.10 + $23.10 = $90.20 per hour), attendance rate ($121.00 + $23.10 = $144.10 per hour), and air support overheads if applicable. Multiply by the number of six minute increments (divide total minutes by 6, multiply by 0.1 of the hourly rate). Budget for cancellation risk: if the event might be cancelled, factor in potential planning charges as a sunk cost. Give written notice of cancellation immediately if the event is cancelled; failing to do so may result in continuing charges. If the event is not among the three exempt events, assume it is subject to the major event regime. For individuals or organisations requesting administrative police services, pay the prescribed fee at the time of request. The methods of payment are not stated in the regulations; contact the department for acceptable forms (likely EFTPOS, credit card or electronic funds transfer). Keep the receipt as proof of payment. For volunteer organisations, have documentation ready to show volunteer status to receive the discounted criminal history check fee of $17.60 rather than $64.90. If the fee is a financial hardship, apply to the Commissioner for a reduction, waiver or refund in writing. The regulations do not set a timeframe, but early application is prudent. For traffic infringement notice records, ensure the request identifies the person correctly to avoid the fee being wasted on an incorrect record. For incident information, specify whether it is for yourself or the Insurance Commission to ensure the correct fee of $55.00 applies. For replacement prosecution documents, note that the $94.00 per hour is GST exclusive, so the actual cost will be $103.40 per hour. Estimate the hours needed and request a quote before proceeding. For high risk escorts, the $169.40 per person per hour is steep; consider whether escorts are absolutely necessary. For all fees and charges, be aware that amounts are indexed annually on 1 July. Check the current version of the regulations on the WA legislation website. For annual compliance, promoters should track the gazette notices each June for the updated rates. If the Commissioner refuses to provide a waiver or charges an amount the payer believes is wrong, the only formal recourse is to seek judicial review or defend a debt recovery proceeding. Gather all correspondence and time records. The regulations do not provide an internal complaints process, but the WA Ombudsman may have jurisdiction to investigate administrative decisions of the police department. Complying with the regulations is largely a matter of understanding the fee schedule and the arithmetic. The real compliance burden falls on the department: it must maintain accurate time recording systems, apply the correct rates, handle payments, and maintain records of waivers. The regulation itself imposes no reporting obligations, but internal audit procedures would be prudent to demonstrate that charges are lawfully calculated.