What's the proper procedure to pass a car on a 2 lane road?

I was traveling north on Hwy 28 with my cruise set at 85. I slowly caught up to a car that was traveling between 79-82. I followed him for around 3 kilometers and his speed fluctuated between 79-82. He pulled to the right as if to let me pass so I did in a safe manner, excelerating to 102 k as I passed, signaled to pull back in and reset my cruise to 85. The car then proceeded to speed up and to my surprise turn on his lights. Yep, I just passed a unmarked police car. I was very polite to the officer as he gave me the ticket but I said to him that you pulled to the right to allow me to pass. He said he didn't and told me speeders are a dime a dozen. Is this something I could take to court and fight? Should I just suck it up and pay the ticket? I'm not a aggresive driver and I feel the officer kind of baited me to pass him by pulling to the right.

Please clarify to all viewers what you mean by "pull to the right"

The officer moved his car to the far right side of the paved road.

I know exactly what you mean. If I see a car approaching me from behind, I assume he will intend to pass me when the way is clear. If I "sense" he wants to pass (you can tell), I lean way to the right of my lane so my mirror won't cause a blind spot for him to see ahead. Just simply being courteous.

Yah, this cop suckered you. Unfortunately, there's no excuse for speeding when passing. I did it once the DANGEROUS way, but got no ticket. Same scenario except it was a marked cruiser. I turned out to pass but only sped up to about 85. It took me almost a full minute to get by him LOL. He just stared me down as I ever-so-slowly inched by him. Of course, on came the cherries. I thought, "The nerve of this guy. He's going to write me a ticket for 5-over!". Well, he didn't write a ticket, but he yelled at me so intensely, I thought the blood vessel in his forehead was going to burst! LOL.

So you did it the safe way and got busted for it. Pretty screwed up Province, eh?

A possible line of defense might be something like it appeared the officer may have been directing you to pass by placing his vehicle to the right of the lane like that. Everyone knows you are to obey the direction of an officer. The car wasn't marked, but was he in uniform?

Yep, the officer made the vehicle catch up, made the vehicle increase speed even more to overtake, just to be "in front". Yeah, really suckered him in

I have a 2 lane area as well. We have more crashes on this hwy, compared to the 401 due to intersections and people thinking they need to go faster. The difference of 80-100km is 4 minutes between the 2 towns.....certainly does not make a much of a difference to justify the increase in speed.

hwybear wrote:

due to intersections

And the undivided road. Traffic moving in opposite directions closer together then 401. Also, vehicles using the opposing lane to pass......many, many factors.

hwybear wrote:

I have a 2 lane area as well. We have more crashes on this hwy, compared to the 401 due to intersections and people thinking they need to go faster. The difference of 80-100km is 4 minutes between the 2 towns.....certainly does not make a much of a difference to justify the increase in speed.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT! Far more drivers are between 90-100kph than those at 80. It's that 2 or 3% that stick to the speed limit (no matter what the conditions) that CAUSE the road rage and risky behavior behind them.

There's nothing BUT 2-lane highways in my area. The vast majority of my 30 years of driving has been spent on them and I KNOW it's a joke to suggest ANY program, initiative, or police blitz is ever going to get the majority of the motoring public to adhere to a speed limit that is not comfortable for them.

The 85th percentile is alive and kicking, and it aint matchin' that speed limit sign. A brief 100kph pass IS more dangerous than NOT passing at all. I agree with that. But folks wouldn't pass if the limits reflected the 85th percentile. I drive back and forth from Stratford to London all the time and rarely pass because the lines are moving at a decent 90-100kph all the time.

HWYBEAR, the officer didn't speed up until after I passed him. He didn't make me speed up. I thought the driver of the car wanted me to pass him by pulling to the far right side of the road while he was going 79 to 82 k's. Out where I live in farm country a lot of people do that. The Drivers Handbook even says that. I did 102 for probably less then 5 seconds and then went back to my normal speed on that road, 85 k's. All I'm asking for is advice on what I should do.

The problem is you did do 102 and that is "technically" against the law. I think if you had passed at say 90-95 KMH we wouldn't be talking to you. Unfortunately, you still got the raw end of the deal.

TA462 wrote:

All I'm asking for is advice on what I should do.

In cases where people pass a police cruiser, marked or unmarked, it usually is difficult to get it beaten in court. If the officer ticketed you for 102 in an 80 zone (I'm assuming that's what you did), you could try to plea-bargain to 95 in save demerit points and a little bit of cash.

A paralegal may be able to help get it wiped out but usually with this sort of situation they'll likely just go for the 15-over ticket. But you could try calling X-Copper and see what they say.

Generally the way to proceed and set up a plea-bargain is to at least look like you're trying to fight it all the way; send the ticket in pleading not guilty, make a disclosure request and see if the officer caught you with a speed measuring device (rear-ward looking radar for example) or simply paced you. If you do want to take it all the way to court, it becomes more challenging without professional help.

And unfortunately, as has been said, if you exceed the posted speed limit while passing another vehicle, it is illegal. Even if it is much safer to quickly speed up and pass, and get back onto your side of the road than hang out in the oncoming traffic lane for three minutes, it is still against the law.

Just a couple of additional points. You were likely caught on the forward antenna (radar) as you would not have reached "take off" speed until you were at least beside him. Radar does not work sideways so your vehicle would have to be in front of his antenna to pick you up.

I WAS SPEEDING

The defence of necessity may apply (oncoming vehicle and you were past the point of no return). And somewhere along this point is where his radar would have started to track you.

I would also try and exploit the moving over to the right as an invitation to pass angle.

I WAS NOT SPEEDING THAT FAST

You have to consider the road (curved, hill, narrow, etc.) which is a contributing factor. There may have been another vehicle beyond his immediate attention that could have generated the radar signal. (OK that one is stretching things a lot but it's all about creating plausible doubt.)

And of course, there's our ongoing discussion about whether any of these "modern" devices are even being tested and used properly.

The problem is that the officer was right beside you and would know that he was traveling at the speed limit. The issue will be how fast you were really going and whether his reading is right.

Never pass a crown vic with black wheels.

From experiences and others it is never usually a good idea to pass a police officer and need to exceed the speed limit to do it.

Always check a car, if it has extra antennas, black steel wheels, or anything else that might be a give away such as extra electronic devices in the car a bad idea to pass it.

There's the proper way and then there's the legal way. Legal way is passing at or below the speed limit, taking your sweet time and hoping that there are no oncoming cars. The proper way, in my opinion, would be to get past as quickly as possible and then reduce your speed back to what you are comfortable with. Totally against the law, though, and if you want to avoid tickets, I would just suck it up and not pass cars unless they are more than 15 km/h under the limit (as if that will ever happen!).

A few years ago I would have floored it past the car and then used engine braking to get back to my original speed. Lately, I've aged about 50 years in my driving habits and drive almost completely within the HTA as much as I can. I tend to just reduce my cruise control when coming up to a slightly slower vehicle, but I would usually still pass someone going 10 km/h slower than I am. And I would still floor it, as the growl of my engine is way too tempting plus I want out of opposing lanes as quickly as possible. But then I'm knowingly breaking the law and that makes me fair game for a ticket.

Always check a car, if it has extra antennas, black steel wheels, or anything else that might be a give away such as extra electronic devices in the car a bad idea to pass it.

Catch me October to April and I have all that!

tdrive2 wrote:

Never pass a crown vic with black wheels.

From experiences and others it is never usually a good idea to pass a police officer and need to exceed the speed limit to do it.

Always check a car, if it has extra antennas, black steel wheels, or anything else that might be a give away such as extra electronic devices in the car a bad idea to pass it.

Hockey pucks on the roof! Clear light bar sitting in the back window. OPP is 2 antennas on the trunk, 1 4ft, the other 1ft, silver 2inch high base, black ring grommet on the mount.......but might be following too close if you see that

What are those hockey pucks for? I don't remember seeing them more than a few years ago.

hockey pucks = antennas for the modem for the mobile work station (laptop)

ticketcombat wrote:

And of course, there's our ongoing discussion about whether any of these "modern" devices are even being tested and used properly.

TC... should we open a second can of worms by bringing forward the argument that, thanks to the Cuthbertson ruling, speeding has effectively become a strict liability offence, and develop a due diligence defence?

Thanks for the advice everyone. The car in question was a brown Crown Vic. It had very dark tinted windows and I don't remember if it had antenna's or not. I've seen enough unmarked cars in my life time travelling from Port Hope to Whitby every day for the last 22 years but this one just didn't look like a Police car. I was driving my 4x4 pickup truck so maybe I just didn't get a good look through the back window being higher up. To be honest I thought it was just an old couple out for a drive and the driver just pulled to the right to be nice and let me by. I haven't been stopped by the Police in probably 18 years so I think I'll take it to court and hope for the best. I would be happy if it was knocked down to 15 over. The fine isn't an issue.

Radar Identified wrote:

ticketcombat wrote:

And of course, there's our ongoing discussion about whether any of these "modern" devices are even being tested and used properly.

TC... should we open a second can of worms by bringing forward the argument that, thanks to the Cuthbertson ruling, speeding has effectively become a strict liability offence, and develop a due diligence defence?

Personally I would push any justice to rule on 128 as a strict liability offence in light of Kanda and the recent 172 rulings. But the onus is still on the defendant to show the "diligence". I can see this coming up where you enter a reduced speed zone. (The sign was blocked, I didn't see it, I'm always careful, etc...) But just going down the road and blaming speedometer creep/flow of traffic is not really being very diligent. You would have to get an expert witness like Bookm to testify of the dangers of going slower than the normal flow of traffic!!!

ticketcombat wrote:

You would have to get an expert witness like Bookm

snicker

Reflections wrote:

ticketcombat wrote:

You would have to get an expert witness like Bookm

snicker

I just had to call the EMS as I fell out of my chair and banged my noggin'

hwybear wrote:

Reflections wrote:

ticketcombat wrote:

You would have to get an expert witness like Bookm

snicker

I just had to call the EMS as I fell out of my chair and banged my noggin'

"OFFICER DOWN, OFFICER DOWN, bring the Boston Creme's and an Extra Large Cafe Mocha stat". "Roger that, whats the 20?". "Computer room, again!".

Well I had my ticket reduced to 15 over today so I didn't lose any points. I was kind of disappointed with the procedure though. I waited for almost two hours before my name was called. I went into the little room and started to tell my story when I was told "sorry to interupt you but we are backed up today, will you plead guilty to 15 over and no points or do you want to take this to trial." I never did finish my story. What a big waste of time for everybody involved. I then had to wait another hour to plead guilty in front of the Justice of the Peace. Funny thing though, while talking to 3 other people they all got tickets from the same officer for passing him because he moved over to the right side of the road. Strange eh. I now know for sure he suckered me in and I now believe I ran into one of the bad police officers people here about. Still I was wrong and I did learn from it.

TA462 wrote:

Well I had my ticket reduced to 15 over today so I didn't lose any points. I was kind of disappointed with the procedure though. I waited for almost two hours before my name was called. I went into the little room and started to tell my story when I was told "sorry to interupt you but we are backed up today, will you plead guilty to 15 over and no points or do you want to take this to trial." I never did finish my story. What a big waste of time for everybody involved. I then had to wait another hour to plead guilty in front of the Justice of the Peace. Funny thing though, while talking to 3 other people they all got tickets from the same officer for passing him because he moved over to the right side of the road. Strange eh. I now know for sure he suckered me in and I now believe I ran into one of the bad police officers people here about. Still I was wrong and I did learn from it.

If your talked before trial, you should have changed your plea. If the officer was behaving as you described, then you could have called the other 3 drivers as character witnesses against the officer.........I wonder how backed up the court really was?

Reflections wrote:

. If the officer was behaving as you described, then you could have called the other 3 drivers as character witnesses against the officer.........I wonder how backed up the court really was?

Yes, your Worship, would like to add 3 witnesses, who also at different times caught up to and passed a police car

hwybear wrote:

Reflections wrote:

. If the officer was behaving as you described, then you could have called the other 3 drivers as character witnesses against the officer.........I wonder how backed up the court really was?

Yes, your Worship, would like to add 3 witnesses, who also at different times caught up to and passed a police car

Yes, your Worship a police car moving below the speed limit and close to the shoulder........

Reflections wrote:

hwybear wrote:

Reflections wrote:

. If the officer was behaving as you described, then you could have called the other 3 drivers as character witnesses against the officer.........I wonder how backed up the court really was?

Yes, your Worship, would like to add 3 witnesses, who also at different times caught up to and passed a police car

Yes, your Worship a police car moving below the speed limit and close to the shoulder........

still travelling within its marked lane and leading by example and not going above the MAXIMUM posted speed limit.

Getting rid of the quote trail..............

Every day on the roads I am and witness others slightly above the PSL..... it is a normal thing in Ontario. If any car is doing less either the driver is new, is looking for something or is unfamiliar with the roads. Flow of traffic is that flow, not an unnatural bottle neck caused by someone using the road for their own purposes. Speeding and slow driving are both hazards in their own right.

That oversized dark-coloured sedan on a two-lane country road, that can't seem to maintain a consistent speed, and that pulls over to the right as if to let you pass, is probably being driven by somebody on a cell phone or an old guy trying to remember why he's out there, but be careful. Do look for antennas, but I'm not even certain that lack of them is conclusive. Sometimes you have to dawdle along for quite a while before they realize you're not going to bite and either speed away or definitively pull off the road. One officer waved to me from the shoulder (in salute, not as in "come here") as he finally let me by. I thought that was sporting of him. It's not like patrolling the 401 -- not much happens out here in the boonies.

booo booo ... I liked the trail, seemed we were going at a nice even pace(maybe even a flow)....and BAM...someone tried to pass on a thread gotcha

I will speak specific to the 2 lanes that I work on, are quite heavy and we have poor drivers (passing groups of cars, cutting in at last moment) and collisions with injuries. A probably 5% at 80km, 75% drive at 85km, 10% 85-95km, remainding 10% above that. The difference in time from one town to the city is 4 minutes (with a 20km speed difference). The town has 2 stoplights and a stop sign as you enter, the city has about 10 traffic lights....so the 4 minutes someone might save is always gone!!