Hello All, I was in Toronto yesterday and pulled over for failing to stop at a red light contrary to Section 144(18) of the HTA. I was turning right at the intersection at the time. The officer was sitting in his car about 60 feet away at a gas station looking like he was about to leave when he supposedly saw me failing to stop at a red light. His car would have been roughly parallel to mine. I was charged under Section 144(18) however should I not have been charged under Section 144(19) of the act for failing to stop on a red right before turning right? When I read Section 114(18) it says that every driver is to stop where the traffic signal is red and not proceed until green, however I am allowed to proceed under Section 114(19) where I have stopped. I believe I should have been charged under Section 114(19) for failing to stop when turning right. All the other information on the ticket looks correct however I plan to fight the ticket as the officer was several feet away from the intersection was looking to leave the gas station at the time I turned. It was raining at the time and I believe the officers vision of the intersection was not clear to notice that I did stop at the intersection. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
Hello All,
I was in Toronto yesterday and pulled over for failing to stop at a red light contrary to Section 144(18) of the HTA. I was turning right at the intersection at the time. The officer was sitting in his car about 60 feet away at a gas station looking like he was about to leave when he supposedly saw me failing to stop at a red light. His car would have been roughly parallel to mine. I was charged under Section 144(18) however should I not have been charged under Section 144(19) of the act for failing to stop on a red right before turning right?
When I read Section 114(18) it says that every driver is to stop where the traffic signal is red and not proceed until green, however I am allowed to proceed under Section 114(19) where I have stopped. I believe I should have been charged under Section 114(19) for failing to stop when turning right.
All the other information on the ticket looks correct however I plan to fight the ticket as the officer was several feet away from the intersection was looking to leave the gas station at the time I turned. It was raining at the time and I believe the officers vision of the intersection was not clear to notice that I did stop at the intersection.
If the officer believes you failed to stop, section 144(18) is correct. While subsection 19 allows you to make a right turn after stopping on a red, the actual offence of failing to stop falls under subsection 18. The only time I can think of when you'd be charged under subsection 19 is if you made a proper stop, but proceeded without yielding to through traffic.
If the officer believes you failed to stop, section 144(18) is correct. While subsection 19 allows you to make a right turn after stopping on a red, the actual offence of failing to stop falls under subsection 18. The only time I can think of when you'd be charged under subsection 19 is if you made a proper stop, but proceeded without yielding to through traffic.
Hello Stanton, thank you for your post however I still don't understand because I was charged for failing to stop on a red however I was making a right hand turn in such circumstances, I would think Section 144(19) would apply since this section also requires that the vehicle stop and then yield, I am being accused of failing to stop in this case. I would think that Section 144(18) would apply only in cases where you cannot proceed on a red until the driver has a green light. Granted in the cops eyes I failed to stop, however I believe section 114(18) would only apply in cases where I would be going straight through the light or turning left. Should not Section 144(19) trump 114(18) in my case and thus be the offence I am charged under since I turned right? Section 144(19) says "despite Section 144(18)....". Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
Hello Stanton, thank you for your post however I still don't understand because I was charged for failing to stop on a red however I was making a right hand turn in such circumstances, I would think Section 144(19) would apply since this section also requires that the vehicle stop and then yield, I am being accused of failing to stop in this case. I would think that Section 144(18) would apply only in cases where you cannot proceed on a red until the driver has a green light. Granted in the cops eyes I failed to stop, however I believe section 114(18) would only apply in cases where I would be going straight through the light or turning left. Should not Section 144(19) trump 114(18) in my case and thus be the offence I am charged under since I turned right? Section 144(19) says "despite Section 144(18)....".
No, it's definitely the correct section. As you said, you were charged for failing to stop for a red light which is subsection 18. It doesn't matter if you're going left, right or straight through, it all falls under the same subsection if you don't stop. Subsection 19 is an exemption (basically saying you won't be charged) for right turns, but since the officer doesn't believe you stopped, you don't qualify for the exemption.
No, it's definitely the correct section. As you said, you were charged for failing to stop for a red light which is subsection 18. It doesn't matter if you're going left, right or straight through, it all falls under the same subsection if you don't stop. Subsection 19 is an exemption (basically saying you won't be charged) for right turns, but since the officer doesn't believe you stopped, you don't qualify for the exemption.
Thanks Stanton for your insight and quick response. The difficulty I am having is the intention of subsection (19). The word stopping does appear in subsection(19) as well, where it says, and I am paraphrasing, after stopping and yielding a driver may turn right. I do not disagree that the issue is stopping and subsection (18) does cover this issue, however subsection (18) also goes no to say that not only is every driver to stop at a red light but they cannot go until a green. The applicable section I feel that should be applied is subsection (19) in my case as I only went through the red light because I was turning right. The issue of stopping is also dealt with in this subsection and is one of the requirements prior to proceeding through the intersection. As such, I could have been, and in my opinion should have been, charged under this subsection (19) as it is most applicable to my case. Out of curiosity is it possible to search case law around whether anyone has ever been charged under subsection (19) for failing to stop. If so, I am thinking if this may help to illustrate the inconsistency in the application of this subsection and its intention. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks
Thanks Stanton for your insight and quick response. The difficulty I am having is the intention of subsection (19). The word stopping does appear in subsection(19) as well, where it says, and I am paraphrasing, after stopping and yielding a driver may turn right.
I do not disagree that the issue is stopping and subsection (18) does cover this issue, however subsection (18) also goes no to say that not only is every driver to stop at a red light but they cannot go until a green. The applicable section I feel that should be applied is subsection (19) in my case as I only went through the red light because I was turning right. The issue of stopping is also dealt with in this subsection and is one of the requirements prior to proceeding through the intersection. As such, I could have been, and in my opinion should have been, charged under this subsection (19) as it is most applicable to my case.
Out of curiosity is it possible to search case law around whether anyone has ever been charged under subsection (19) for failing to stop. If so, I am thinking if this may help to illustrate the inconsistency in the application of this subsection and its intention.
Again, it's an exemption, not a separate charge. Here's a recent decision in regards to 144(18) where they cite 144(19). You'll note the driver was charged under 144(18) for making a right on a red and found guilty. http://canlii.ca/en/on/oncj/doc/2011/20 ... cj215.html You can try and research additional case law that supports your belief, but I don't think you'll find any. CanLII (the site I linked to) is an excellent place to start.
Again, it's an exemption, not a separate charge.
Here's a recent decision in regards to 144(18) where they cite 144(19). You'll note the driver was charged under 144(18) for making a right on a red and found guilty.
You can try and research additional case law that supports your belief, but I don't think you'll find any. CanLII (the site I linked to) is an excellent place to start.
Thanks Stanton for your reply. One other question I took a look at the ticket again and it reads that the set fine is $260 but the total payable is $320, shouldn't it be $325? If so could I get the ticket quashed on the incorrect total? On a side note I went by the corner again this morning where the cop stopped me and there are large trees and bushes which could obstruct the view. Also, given it was raining and I am sure his line of sight to the white line of the intersection is not in view and he could not have clearly seen that I stopped. Looking forward to your response. Thanks
Thanks Stanton for your reply. One other question I took a look at the ticket again and it reads that the set fine is $260 but the total payable is $320, shouldn't it be $325? If so could I get the ticket quashed on the incorrect total?
On a side note I went by the corner again this morning where the cop stopped me and there are large trees and bushes which could obstruct the view. Also, given it was raining and I am sure his line of sight to the white line of the intersection is not in view and he could not have clearly seen that I stopped.
Yes, the fine should read $260/$325. Your best bet may be to hope a JP notices the error and quashes the ticket. There are some threads that will walk you through the process if they don't.
Yes, the fine should read $260/$325. Your best bet may be to hope a JP notices the error and quashes the ticket. There are some threads that will walk you through the process if they don't.
Thanks, so I shouldn't mention this up frount? I was thinking of seeing the prosecutor and mentioning it to him to see if he could do something about it? Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
Thanks, so I shouldn't mention this up frount? I was thinking of seeing the prosecutor and mentioning it to him to see if he could do something about it? Please let me know your thoughts.
(14) 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. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (14).
Exception – turn
(19) Despite subsection (18) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may,
(a) turn to the right; or
(b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street,
without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19).
wouldn't (19) be the exception to (14) for red light right turns?
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.
