I have a question I would like to ask concerning turning right on a red light. I was approaching on the right turn only lane to the traffic light which turned from amber to red. As soon as the red light came on, there were advance green left turn arrow for the intersection I was for the cars that were traveling right to left and left to right of me. Since there was a lot of traffic from where I was coming home from work, I was forced to make a complete stop several car lengths behind the line. As soon as I noticed that there were no cars entering the lane I was turning into, I quickly accelerated and proceed with the right turn when the advance green left arrow was still in effect. A police officer pulled me over accusing me of not stopping for the red light and wrote me a ticket for the Highway Traffic Act 144.18. I decided to go to trial for this traffic ticket. Do you have any suggestions or advice that I should take note of or be aware of? Any help is appreciated.
I have a question I would like to ask concerning turning right on a red light.
I was approaching on the right turn only lane to the traffic light which turned from amber to red. As soon as the red light came on, there were advance green left turn arrow for the intersection I was for the cars that were traveling right to left and left to right of me. Since there was a lot of traffic from where I was coming home from work, I was forced to make a complete stop several car lengths behind the line. As soon as I noticed that there were no cars entering the lane I was turning into, I quickly accelerated and proceed with the right turn when the advance green left arrow was still in effect. A police officer pulled me over accusing me of not stopping for the red light and wrote me a ticket for the Highway Traffic Act 144.18.
I decided to go to trial for this traffic ticket. Do you have any suggestions or advice that I should take note of or be aware of? Any help is appreciated.
Hello Ravage, and welcome to the forum. A question for you - was your vehicle completely stopped at the time when there were no other vehicles between your car and the intersection? In other words, did you just follow the car in front of you without stopping first?
Hello Ravage, and welcome to the forum.
A question for you - was your vehicle completely stopped at the time when there were no other vehicles between your car and the intersection? In other words, did you just follow the car in front of you without stopping first?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
Hi racer, It was around 6pm on a weekday when this happened. There were maybe 1 or 2 cars between me and the intersection. Also, there were also probably 2-3 cars behind me as well that made the turn at the same time. There were actually 1 or 2 officers set up pulling all the cars over on the lane that was closing. Basically, I was turning into a road with 2 lanes and 1 closing lane.
Hi racer,
It was around 6pm on a weekday when this happened. There were maybe 1 or 2 cars between me and the intersection. Also, there were also probably 2-3 cars behind me as well that made the turn at the same time.
There were actually 1 or 2 officers set up pulling all the cars over on the lane that was closing. Basically, I was turning into a road with 2 lanes and 1 closing lane.
Ok, so here is a no-fault sequence of events (I assume 2 vehicles in front of you) 1-st vehicle comes to a complete stop before the crosswalk line (I assume there is one there), then turns right. All other vehicles advance, 2-nd vehicle stops, then turns right. Your vehicle advances to the intersection, STOPS COMPLETELY, then turns right. And so on. Here is a YOUR fault sequence of events 1-st vehicle comes to a complete stop before the crosswalk line (I assume there is one there), then turns right. All other vehicles advance, 2-nd vehicle stops, then turns right. Your vehicle follows right behind the 2-nd vehicle without stopping before the crosswalk line and makes a right turn.
Ok, so here is a no-fault sequence of events (I assume 2 vehicles in front of you)
1-st vehicle comes to a complete stop before the crosswalk line (I assume there is one there), then turns right.
All other vehicles advance, 2-nd vehicle stops, then turns right.
Your vehicle advances to the intersection, STOPS COMPLETELY, then turns right.
And so on.
Here is a YOUR fault sequence of events
1-st vehicle comes to a complete stop before the crosswalk line (I assume there is one there), then turns right.
All other vehicles advance, 2-nd vehicle stops, then turns right.
Your vehicle follows right behind the 2-nd vehicle without stopping before the crosswalk line and makes a right turn.
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
It was not just me that the police officers pulled over, so the two scenarios wouldn't fit completely. For the no-fault and my fault, will it make a difference if i stopped one car length before the crosswalk line? I made a stop, but it wasn't precisely behind the line.
It was not just me that the police officers pulled over, so the two scenarios wouldn't fit completely.
For the no-fault and my fault, will it make a difference if i stopped one car length before the crosswalk line? I made a stop, but it wasn't precisely behind the line.
Here is another section that you were in violation of: HTA 144 (14) Green Arrow - Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing one or more green arrow indications only OR in combination with a circular red or circular amber indication and facing the indication may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow.
Here is another section that you were in violation of:
HTA 144 (14) Green Arrow - Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing one or more green arrow indications only OR in combination with a circular red or circular amber indication and facing the indication may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
I've never given this section of the Act much thought, but now I wonder what it means by "facing the indication." Say there are two (or more) lanes of traffic in each direction, with a traffic signal light stack above or to the right of the right-hand lane, and another signal light stack above or to the left of the left-hand lane. Only the one on the left has the green left-turn arrow component, and the arrow is illuminated. The one on the right is a standard round red over round amber over round green, and it is showing red. I would have thought a vehicle in the right-hand lane could legally make a right turn as usual (after coming to a full stop, ascertaining that there were no pedestrians or other traffic, etc., etc.). But now I wonder: does that left-turn green arrow govern the whole intersection? A vehicle in the right lane is "approaching the traffic control signal ... and facing the indication" (facing it at an angle, but certainly facing it -- not facing away from it), which suggests that any right turn at that intersection, no matter how carefully made, might be illegal whenever any green left arrow is lit. I'll have to watch for this when I'm on the road tomorrow, but I would appreciate some guidance.
hwybear wrote:
Here is another section that you were in violation of:
HTA 144 (14) Green Arrow - Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing one or more green arrow indications only OR in combination with a circular red or circular amber indication and facing the indication may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow.
I've never given this section of the Act much thought, but now I wonder what it means by "facing the indication."
Say there are two (or more) lanes of traffic in each direction, with a traffic signal light stack above or to the right of the right-hand lane, and another signal light stack above or to the left of the left-hand lane. Only the one on the left has the green left-turn arrow component, and the arrow is illuminated. The one on the right is a standard round red over round amber over round green, and it is showing red.
I would have thought a vehicle in the right-hand lane could legally make a right turn as usual (after coming to a full stop, ascertaining that there were no pedestrians or other traffic, etc., etc.). But now I wonder: does that left-turn green arrow govern the whole intersection? A vehicle in the right lane is "approaching the traffic control signal ... and facing the indication" (facing it at an angle, but certainly facing it -- not facing away from it), which suggests that any right turn at that intersection, no matter how carefully made, might be illegal whenever any green left arrow is lit. I'll have to watch for this when I'm on the road tomorrow, but I would appreciate some guidance.
This is very interesting to say the least. I would say no one can turn right on the red in this instance, b/c the section read "may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow". Making the turn on the red, would not be following the direction shown by the green arrow. Open lane or not. Most officers do not even know about this section. So quite honestly, how would most of the public know. Then a JP would probably wonder about finding guilt, although ignorance is no excuse. If there was a collision, when the person turns right on a red, and an opposing vehicle had turned left on a green arrow, think this would be an appropriate charge.
Reflections wrote:
No, you can still turn right as long as you have an empty lane to turn into.
This is very interesting to say the least. I would say no one can turn right on the red in this instance, b/c the section read "may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow". Making the turn on the red, would not be following the direction shown by the green arrow. Open lane or not.
Most officers do not even know about this section. So quite honestly, how would most of the public know. Then a JP would probably wonder about finding guilt, although ignorance is no excuse. If there was a collision, when the person turns right on a red, and an opposing vehicle had turned left on a green arrow, think this would be an appropriate charge.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
In this case, why are there also signs saying "No right turn on red light" on some intersections with left turn arrow indications? Perhaps you have to face the arrow indication for the law to be applicable?
hwybear wrote:
Here is another section that you were in violation of:
HTA 144 (14) Green Arrow - Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing one or more green arrow indications only OR in combination with a circular red or circular amber indication and facing the indication may proceed ONLY to follow the direction shown by the arrow.
In this case, why are there also signs saying "No right turn on red light" on some intersections with left turn arrow indications? Perhaps you have to face the arrow indication for the law to be applicable?
"The more laws, the less justice" - Marcus Tullius Cicero
"The hardest thing to explain is the obvious"
This would be my impression. Rights on reds are allowed in Ontario unless signed otherwise. If the road you are turning into has two or more lanes then I say go ahead. If you are turning onto a road with only one lane then you have to wait. Quite simple really.
racer wrote:
In this case, why are there also signs saying "No right turn on red light" on some intersections with left turn arrow indications? Perhaps you have to face the arrow indication for the law to be applicable?
This would be my impression. Rights on reds are allowed in Ontario unless signed otherwise. If the road you are turning into has two or more lanes then I say go ahead. If you are turning onto a road with only one lane then you have to wait. Quite simple really.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I came back from the court yesterday and I'm glad to say that my charge was changed to a 144.10 instead. Obeying lane lights (10) Every driver shall obey every traffic control signal that applies to the lane that he or she is in. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (10). I was able to prove that I did make a stop before the intersection and such, so the judge was very reasonable. Although I may have went on further on about how I am only concerned about my original violation, but who cares, no demerit points. Thanks for your help, guys
I came back from the court yesterday and I'm glad to say that my charge was changed to a 144.10 instead.
Obeying lane lights
(10) Every driver shall obey every traffic control signal that applies to the lane that he or she is in. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (10).
I was able to prove that I did make a stop before the intersection and such, so the judge was very reasonable. Although I may have went on further on about how I am only concerned about my original violation, but who cares, no demerit points.
I''m still not sure that 144 (14) cannot be interpreted either way. 144 (10) "Every driver shall obey every traffic control signal that applies to the lane that he or she is in," might imply that separate signal stacks would apply differentially to the individual lanes at an intersection with more than one lane in each direction. That's what I've always thought (agreeing with racer and Reflections). But 144 (10) does say "every" signal that applies to your lane, so more than one signal may apply. And the Act does go on in several subsections, including 144 (14), to use the formula "approaching a traffic control signal showing a [whatever] indication and facing the indication" (emphasis added), which I think could well be interpreted to mean that any right turn at that intersection would be illegal whenever any green arrow is lit. It depends on what you think the Act means by"approaching" and "facing." The Act does not say in 144 (14) that you have to be approaching the green arrow in the signal "nearest your lane" or "directly in front of you" to be governed by it, only that you are "approaching" the signal and "facing" it. How many degrees off your heading can the green arrow signal be before you are no longer "facing" it? I think we all inadvertently break laws every time we drive: all we can do is drive responsibly and sensibly, and avoid those odd things that we know may result in our getting charged and convicted. This is just something I'd never thought of, that might be one of those odd things: any given JP might jump either way on it.
I''m still not sure that 144 (14) cannot be interpreted either way.
144 (10) "Every driver shall obey every traffic control signal that applies to the lane that he or she is in," might imply that separate signal stacks would apply differentially to the individual lanes at an intersection with more than one lane in each direction. That's what I've always thought (agreeing with racer and Reflections). But 144 (10) does say "every" signal that applies to your lane, so more than one signal may apply. And the Act does go on in several subsections, including 144 (14), to use the formula "approaching a traffic control signal showing a [whatever] indication and facing the indication" (emphasis added), which I think could well be interpreted to mean that any right turn at that intersection would be illegal whenever any green arrow is lit.
It depends on what you think the Act means by"approaching" and "facing."
The Act does not say in 144 (14) that you have to be approaching the green arrow in the signal "nearest your lane" or "directly in front of you" to be governed by it, only that you are "approaching" the signal and "facing" it. How many degrees off your heading can the green arrow signal be before you are no longer "facing" it?
I think we all inadvertently break laws every time we drive: all we can do is drive responsibly and sensibly, and avoid those odd things that we know may result in our getting charged and convicted. This is just something I'd never thought of, that might be one of those odd things: any given JP might jump either way on it.
So when you come to an intersection with a "Left Turn" light, but also the regular lights this is when you follow your arrows. If the left turn arrow is on and regular lights are green then all of you go. If only the "Turning" arrows are lit then turns may be completed. If an officer is splitting hair on this then someone hasn't had his "TIMS" yet.
"Every driver shall obey every traffic control signal that applies to the lane that he or she is in,"
So when you come to an intersection with a "Left Turn" light, but also the regular lights this is when you follow your arrows. If the left turn arrow is on and regular lights are green then all of you go. If only the "Turning" arrows are lit then turns may be completed. If an officer is splitting hair on this then someone hasn't had his "TIMS" yet.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
So next traffic stop I have all I have to do is subliminally mention "TIMS" 15 to 20 times and the officer will thank me for my time and tell me to be on my way???????????????
So next traffic stop I have all I have to do is subliminally mention "TIMS" 15 to 20 times and the officer will thank me for my time and tell me to be on my way???????????????
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com
I'm turning right on a Red unless there's a sign specifically stating not to. It's what people behind me would expect me to do, and being predictable is usually the safe thing to do and decreases the chance of road rage. Note: We have ONE intersection in town that says "No right on red" and is meant to deter drivers from using a certain side-street. It was put up to pacify a bunch of whiny (but influential) residents who felt there were too many cars using "their" road. I'm not sure if disobeying it would be an HTA offence or it it's just a city by-law. Most cars ignore it and turn. The speed limit on this side-street was also reduced to 40kmh, for no other reason than to appease the residents living there. I'm not sure if a municipality can legally enforce an artificially low speed limit (for reasons other than safely) but I regularly see the local LEO's running radar (*or) laser on it.
I'm turning right on a Red unless there's a sign specifically stating not to. It's what people behind me would expect me to do, and being predictable is usually the safe thing to do and decreases the chance of road rage.
Note: We have ONE intersection in town that says "No right on red" and is meant to deter drivers from using a certain side-street. It was put up to pacify a bunch of whiny (but influential) residents who felt there were too many cars using "their" road. I'm not sure if disobeying it would be an HTA offence or it it's just a city by-law. Most cars ignore it and turn.
The speed limit on this side-street was also reduced to 40kmh, for no other reason than to appease the residents living there. I'm not sure if a municipality can legally enforce an artificially low speed limit (for reasons other than safely) but I regularly see the local LEO's running radar (*or) laser on it.
Last edited by Bookm on Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
just don't whine to the rest of us IF you should ever get a ticket then...you are now well informed!! :) HTA charge with 2 demerit points = Disobey sign Absolutely enforceable, and municipalities can set their own speed limits. HTA 128(2)
Bookm wrote:
I'm turning right on a Red unless there's a sign specifically stating not to.
just don't whine to the rest of us IF you should ever get a ticket then...you are now well informed!!
Bookm wrote:
I'm not sure if disobeying it would be an HTA offence or it it's just a city by-law. Most cars ignore it and turn.
HTA charge with 2 demerit points = Disobey sign
Bookm wrote:
The speed limit on this side-street was also reduced to 40kmh, for no other reason than to appease the residents living there. I'm not sure if a municipality can legally enforce an artificially low speed limit (for reasons other than safely) but I regularly see the local LEO's running radar of laser on it.
Absolutely enforceable, and municipalities can set their own speed limits. HTA 128(2)
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
just don't whine to the rest of us IF you should ever get a ticket then...you are now well informed!! :) NP.. I obey the sign. But I was once honked at, from behind, to get going (groan).
hwybear wrote:
Bookm wrote:
I'm turning right on a Red unless there's a sign specifically stating not to.
just don't whine to the rest of us IF you should ever get a ticket then...you are now well informed!!
NP.. I obey the sign. But I was once honked at, from behind, to get going (groan).
HTA charge with 2 demerit points = Disobey sign And what would be the OHTA subsection for that? HTA 182(2) Signs also must be in listed in Regulations to be enforced...most of those are in Ont. Reg. 615
racer wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Bookm wrote:
I'm not sure if disobeying it would be an HTA offence or it it's just a city by-law. Most cars ignore it and turn.
HTA charge with 2 demerit points = Disobey sign
And what would be the OHTA subsection for that?
HTA 182(2) Signs also must be in listed in Regulations to be enforced...most of those are in Ont. Reg. 615
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
The fine is not the issue but I am worried about insurance rates. First speeding ticket in my life Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court
So was at court today in Orillia for a friend, and I had submitted a couple notice of motion a couple weeks ago that I wanted to deal with before arraignment. I met with prosecutor before hand, and it went something like this:
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law?"
Me: "What do you mean?"
Prosecutor: "Do you have the case law for your motion?"
Me: "All the case law is quoted in the motion that I…
1)failure to change address on license (i got married a couple of months earlier and moved)
2) license plate not fully visible
I got pulled over because I had 2 letters peeling off my license plate. I know ignorance isn't a defense, but I really had no idea that this was an issue. Plus, you see many cars on the road with peeling plates. I got both tickets and…
I was driving around 140km/h on a 100km/h posted on the highway. I was in the fast lane. The officer was very nice and reduced it to no points and just 15km/h over.
I only have my G2.
1. Will this affect me taking the G test next month?
2. I am very grateful for the officer lowering the ticket... should I just pay the 52.5$ and leave it as is.. I am a secondary driver under my dads name and we have…
Hi, thanks in advance for the help. Been driving for 10 years, clean record until today when I got slapped with two tickets. First: going 135 at 100 on the 401, second: not having a valid sticker (I recently moved and completely forgot about it)
My friend tells me I should fight the speed ticket, if anything to reduce the fine and points. Would be alot of help if anyone could walk me through…
My wife, who has never had a traffic ticket in her life, just got 11 points.
Two tickets: "following too closely" and "failure to stop"
She was on a residential street and was behind a car at a crosswalk waiting for a pedestrian. Pedestrian crossed, they continued. Cop was drivig towards them down a side street , and as they passed he went after my wife.
I was driving in mid lane and was following a line of cars around speed limit.
The vehicle in front of me was large and I decided to change to the left lane to get better line sight.
As soon as I entered the left lane, I saw the car in front of me approximately 200m away stopped dead (for some odd reason, there was more traffic on the left lane).
Over the last few months I have received several parking tickets from the City of Kitchener. I haven't paid any of them and have attempted to dicuss the situation with the parking authority of the City, however, they're very unreceptive and defensive.
I work at a downtown construction site....ironically a Court House. The site takes up a whole city block, of which ONE side has 2 hour parking…
I was driving on a teusday night in the rain and fog at whites and highview by St. Mary CSS in Pickering, ON. At the time I was waiting at a red light to make a left north onto whites. There was also a car on the opposite side of the intersection making a left. The cars beams were pointed almost directly at my face and as a result, with the combination of the rain and fog, I…
I am new to this website and this is my first post so please forgive me if I've put this question in the wrong place. Please bear with me until I learn the ropes a bit.
So here are my questions:
Antique cars and hot rods (1930's- early '60's) and seat belt use in Ontario. If these vehicles never came from the respective factories with any seat belts, do they have to be retrofitted ?
OK so Jshreck has been taking some heat for the concept of providing the DL as being not required and therefore inadmissable in court. Personally, I think that argument would fall on deaf ears in the lower court and any chance at victory would have to be in the highest court. That would be quite something. When pigs fly I think, but along that line of thought, allow me to continue.......
I have a court date soon and am wondering whether the officers just read off their disclosure notes when interrogated.
Basically, according to the disclosure notes and the said distances and speeds quoted, by doing some simple math it just doesn't add up. My concern is whether the officer can change his story when on the stand after maybe realizing this?
Last week I was driving home from college in the sauga area. I drive a 1995 Chevy Monte Carlo v6 which I've owned since 2000, I really haven't done anything to the car except tinted windows (not completely darken) and some rims, and Nothing Engine wise. Anyway I look in my rear view mirror and out of no where i see cherry flashing. When pulled over the officer asked do you…
I was charged 2 days ago with RED LIGHT - FAIL TO STOP and set fined $150 and I guess 3 points. I was driving turning left on the intersection with a traffic light, and when I jst about to turn left the light turned to orange and I didn't have enough time to stop. Once I turned I saw the light turned to red and 2seconds later I saw a police beacon flashing through my rear-view mirror. It…
I figured pleading not guilty is the same as saying it was signed which is stupid. A friend of mine told me I could plead guilty with explanation and try to get the fine reduced when I come in.
So this Friday I was stopped by a local officer for going 110 in a 80zone. He also claims I was going 105 in a 50zone,which we literally passed when he stopped me as I was braking. It has been 3 days already and I can't seem to locate my ticket on their Internet site "pay ticket". Is there a way to determine if he has filed for certificate of offence to the courts? It has been 3 days I presume…
My trial date is in a couple days for a speeding ticket (york region) and i am nervous it is my first ticket ever as well as first trial
I did notice my ticket was filed beyond 7 days, 10 days after the day i got the ticket to be exact, which is stamped on the ticket. is this enough to have it dismissed?
If you look close enough, beside the drivers' side "A" pillar you will see a white circle = front antenna of Genesis radar......plus look above the dash pad...there is the Spectre RDD.
Any suggestions on how to handle this? I can't afford to spend a day at the court 
