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
Hi so I have a bizzare situation. Today I received a summons for "being the owner of a motor vehicle bearing Vehicle Identification Number ###, failed to submit the vehicle, equipment or drawn vehicle for inspection or tests as required by an officer" for a vehicle I previously owned. Apparently a violation of HTA 82(9).
The date of offense is June 15, the summons was issued on October 26th and I…
Hi, I need some help for the ticket of lmproper left turn.
When i drove my car from east to west, intending to make a left turn and stop in front of stop line. There was a car in front of me, which has turn on yellow light. The light was turning red and then I thought I cannot leave in the intersection and turned, an incoming car was runing the light and hit me. No one got hurt but both cars had…
Have a ticket in which the radar used was a Genesis VP Directional. I had downloaded the manual for a Genesis VP but I now realize that the unit is not the same so it is the wrong manual. My trial is very soon so I do not have time to ask for disclosure of the manual.
Does anyone have access to an electronic version of the manual for Genesis VP Directional?
I was pulled over today in the city of Oakville for going 75 in a 40 zone. However, I am 100 percent certain that I was going only 50 in the 40 zone. When I was pulled over, I was driving my Dad's car which I felt was the reason I was getting stopped since two teenagers driving a 2013 S Class. He asked does I know why I am being pulled over and I…
I really need help on fighting my 9 tickets i received from one police officer. Here is some background of what happened!
I was caught speeding 66km on a 40km (school zone) on January 29, 2010. I was driving my friend's car and turns out she didnt renew the validation on the vehicle and didnt leave the up to date insurance paper on the car.
Hey question that I think here's probably the best place to get the answer:
I was charged with a careless driving offence in oct, trail in early april, so as of right now my insurance record is 100% clean... except the officer did file an accident report at the scene where I was classified at fault due to it being PI (although very minor). The person I hit did not sue etc, so the insurance company…
Very much unintentionally passed a stopped bus, with sign and flashing lights. Didn't realize I had done it until I was at the end of the bus. I'll save you my sob story, but it was truly accidental. I'm generally very cautious and have a perfect driving record. Never been stopped.
While I realize if a cop had seen me that I would have gotten a ticket, there were none in sight. Though I may very…
I was recently pulled over for running a red and I wasnt able to find my wallet in the car at the time to hand over my license. I had a passport in the vehicle that he used. The wallet was in the vehicle, it just fell through the seats. (Tough to find a black leather wallet in a black/black leather truck at night).
The officer still wrote the tickets for both he signed the one ticket (failure to…
I was passing a vehicle that was going slow for me and there was an oncoming vehicle coming at me. I speed up to get around the person I was passing and the oncoming vehicle turns out to be a cop who turns around and tickets me for going 110km in a 80km zone. How does it work with passing a vehicle? Once I passed the vehicle I went back down to my original speed of just under 100. The officer…
I picked up a brand new (old stock) Fuzzbuster a while ago at auction (wopping $5!!) and I want to mount it on the dash of my old GTO as a cool accessory when I show it at car shows. But I'm not sure if it's legal or not.
Here's my thoughts:
- It is early 70's technology (x-band) so it won't detect modern police radar. That's assuming no police force uses the old x-band frequency.
Hi guys, I'm still a little in shock of getting my first traffic ticket...
On Monday afternoon, I was returning from Toronto to Ottawa on HW416, I was driving about 15 over 100 like always. Then a car came very close to me on the left lane and made me nervous, I speed up unintentionally to pass the car and change lane, but while doing that a police car pull out of the median. He was hiding in…
May i ask this question regarding transport trucks limited to 105 km/h. Moving road blocks or safety?
IMO it isnt speed that kills. I find transport trucks infact help keep the road going. With cars that choose to not move to the right and slow down the middle lane the trucks would try to pass in their passing lane therefore the slower traffic would move right.
Received a notice from the police that a motion is being put forward to adjourn upcoming trial date. Notice indicates that an officer has sworn an affidavit that the crucial witness cannot attend date trial is set for (we know there is a social engagement at 7:30 pm for the witness, trial time is 1:30 pm). This further delay is a big problem to my daughter's case. She is moving away to…
This is what happened. I was travelling west on a four lane city street that was very light with traffic. I was making a left hand turn into a wide driveway of a business. There was traffic lights about 100 yards past the driveway and were red for the east-west traffic. I was in the left lane with my signal on and there was no oncoming traffic due to the red light. I was slowed right down…
I was driving my families older car and got pulled over, and the police officer informed me my plate was dirty. He issued me a ticket of $110 for the 13(2) act and obstruct plate as the offense. He informed me that such a plate could be used to avoid red lights as well as 407 tolls, also that buying a new plate can help to lower the ticket if I fight the charge, and that he also took a picture…
I received a red light camera ticket. In the picture, you see an ambulance in front of me with flashing lights. I had moved to alleviate the traffic behind me for the emergency vehicles coming behind it.
Is this a possible defense, if so, does anyone know any good case law to justify this position?
what happens if they charge someone for driving at 151Km/hr in montreal and they put for trial, appear after some months and sadly lost the trial ?
In montreal its $300 fine and 5demerit points ...
I heard Ontario and Qubec share the information. So once the trial is over ( and when the file moved to ontario) will his car gets towed and licence get suspended for 7days (later to 30 days ) ? and he…
I got a notice in the mail that trial is set four weeks from today, so it's time to request disclosure. I have zero chance of getting an 11b since trial is less than two months after the offense date and the officer did not reduce the charge. I really want to try and create delays on the trial, to reduce the chance of the officer showing up on multiple occasions. Is there any known loop-holes…
This weekend my father was involved in an accident with a transit bus in Burlington, ON. After the police showed up he was charged with "Fail to obey stop sign" Sec. 136(1)(a). At this particular intersection there NO stop signs but there are traffic lights. There is construction going on there so one of the light posts is smaller.
Driving conditions were terribly wet and visibility was low.…
So my boyfriend and I recently started dating. I have a vehicle that was insured. Insurance cost too much and I found it was just as easy to walk to work due to how close it was. But I didn't want to get rid of my car just yet, plus I'm still making payments on it as well. When we moved into our appartment together, I had it towed to my parking spot out back.
I was making a left hand legal turn on a green light, a driver came through the lane I was supposed to be going into ran the red and hit me head on as I was turning into my lane. When the officer came he was telling me that I was racing and driving recklessly because apparently there was reports of street racing in the area. I was not charged on the scene for this but I'm scared i am going to be…
I got a ticket for failure to surrender insurance because I did not have my new insurance stubs with me, just a bunch of expired ones. My policy number has not changed, so I asked the officer to just run the policy number so I could prove that I was in fact insured. He said they don't have that ability, handed me the ticket and reminded me that my car could have been impounded.
So I'm in a bit of a pickle and would appreciate if someone could clarify something for me.
I'm less than a month away (test on April 6th) from getting my full G license, and got a speeding ticket recently. The ticket was for 49km/h over the posted limit of 100km/h on the 403 in Oakville/Halton region, but was reduced from the initial ~60km/h over.
