Was driving home from work Friday and decided to try a new route. Once I hit the QEW it started to down pour heavily for a few minutes. I was only on the QEW for 3 or 4 exits then went to hop on the 406. When I went to slow down I started sliding and could not control the vehicle and as a result slammed into the guard rail. I am confident I was not speeding and was being very cautious (just moments before I remember noting my speed was 95kph in a 100kph zone). There was little damage and a cop arrived almost immediately. As soon as I rolled down my window he said "You were driving too fast." He ended up charging me with careless driving claiming he had to do it and recommended I speak to a prosecutor to get it dropped, and gave me a lot of info on how to do so. It seems odd that he would charge me with something then tell me how to get out of it. I'm going to speak to the prosecutor today and will not sign anything he may offer just yet. Still trying to wrap my head around this whole nightmare. I think part of hte reason is when I filled out the paper work it asked what speed I was going, it didn't specify if it meant when I hit the wall, when I entered the off ramp, or when I started to slide. I put down that my best guess was 80 (as I started to slide right after I down shifted to 4th, and that's what speed I'm usually at when I do that shift). He asked me what the caution was and I said I wasn't sure as I don't normally go that route but guessed 70. He laughed and said no caution is any more than 30. This is what I think caused him to go with the careless. He did not give me the opportunity to clarify when I was implying I was going 80. I also noticed on the drive home at least 3 or 4 off ramps with posted limits of 70. So when I speak to the prosecutor I was going to bring up the rain, maybe this info about the offramps, but was also considering mentioning my tires. I was supposed to have my winter tires put on the next day and my summer tires were done, they are rather bald and I had no intentions of driving with them again after that day. I don't want to bring this up and then find out that knowingly driving with tires that were less than ideal would only make it even more careless or that it'd be a charge of it's own. I also thing it's blindly obvious I did not hit the guard rail at 80 as there is very little damage, based on the damage I'd guess I was going 20-30kph when I made impact, showing that I had managed to slow considerably despite having no traction. I also drive a sports car which everyone knows always seems to make them think you're driving like an idiot. Anyways, if anyone has any suggestions or whatnot I'd love to hear it. Still debating on if I should hire a paralegal. On top of a $490 ticket I can only imagine my insurance will skyrocket afterwards and I may no longer be able to afford to drive. So spending a few hundred if it means getting it knocked down a little more may be worth while.
Was driving home from work Friday and decided to try a new route. Once I hit the QEW it started to down pour heavily for a few minutes. I was only on the QEW for 3 or 4 exits then went to hop on the 406. When I went to slow down I started sliding and could not control the vehicle and as a result slammed into the guard rail. I am confident I was not speeding and was being very cautious (just moments before I remember noting my speed was 95kph in a 100kph zone). There was little damage and a cop arrived almost immediately. As soon as I rolled down my window he said "You were driving too fast." He ended up charging me with careless driving claiming he had to do it and recommended I speak to a prosecutor to get it dropped, and gave me a lot of info on how to do so. It seems odd that he would charge me with something then tell me how to get out of it.
I'm going to speak to the prosecutor today and will not sign anything he may offer just yet. Still trying to wrap my head around this whole nightmare. I think part of hte reason is when I filled out the paper work it asked what speed I was going, it didn't specify if it meant when I hit the wall, when I entered the off ramp, or when I started to slide. I put down that my best guess was 80 (as I started to slide right after I down shifted to 4th, and that's what speed I'm usually at when I do that shift). He asked me what the caution was and I said I wasn't sure as I don't normally go that route but guessed 70. He laughed and said no caution is any more than 30. This is what I think caused him to go with the careless. He did not give me the opportunity to clarify when I was implying I was going 80. I also noticed on the drive home at least 3 or 4 off ramps with posted limits of 70.
So when I speak to the prosecutor I was going to bring up the rain, maybe this info about the offramps, but was also considering mentioning my tires. I was supposed to have my winter tires put on the next day and my summer tires were done, they are rather bald and I had no intentions of driving with them again after that day. I don't want to bring this up and then find out that knowingly driving with tires that were less than ideal would only make it even more careless or that it'd be a charge of it's own. I also thing it's blindly obvious I did not hit the guard rail at 80 as there is very little damage, based on the damage I'd guess I was going 20-30kph when I made impact, showing that I had managed to slow considerably despite having no traction. I also drive a sports car which everyone knows always seems to make them think you're driving like an idiot.
Anyways, if anyone has any suggestions or whatnot I'd love to hear it. Still debating on if I should hire a paralegal. On top of a $490 ticket I can only imagine my insurance will skyrocket afterwards and I may no longer be able to afford to drive. So spending a few hundred if it means getting it knocked down a little more may be worth while.
General consensus on these forums is that for a careless driving charge, legal representation is recommended. Its considered a major conviction by insurance providers, and youre rates could double. The good news is that prosecutors are usually quite willing to offer plea deals with careless driving charges to something much less serious (i.e. leave roadway not in safety). In your case, they may have difficulty even proving the charge since its a single motor vehicle accident with no witnesses. It might be best to fight the charge outright rather than even accept a plea deal.
General consensus on these forums is that for a careless driving charge, legal representation is recommended. Its considered a major conviction by insurance providers, and youre rates could double.
The good news is that prosecutors are usually quite willing to offer plea deals with careless driving charges to something much less serious (i.e. leave roadway not in safety). In your case, they may have difficulty even proving the charge since its a single motor vehicle accident with no witnesses. It might be best to fight the charge outright rather than even accept a plea deal.
The fact that it was raining isn't going to help you. The typical response from prosecutors when people say they crashed because of the weather is that you should have been going slower if the weather was bad. Prosecutors tend to view the collision in bad weather as evidence of the fact that you weren't driving "with due care and attention" (to the weather/road conditions. What you told the officer about what you thought about the warning signs and/or your speed is probably not going to be relevant since it is unlikely the crown will seek to have those statements introduced at trial to support the charge. If you admit to having bad tires that will tend to support a finding of careless driving because, again, the prosecutor will likely say that you should have been driving more carefully if you knew there was a problem with your tires.
The fact that it was raining isn't going to help you. The typical response from prosecutors when people say they crashed because of the weather is that you should have been going slower if the weather was bad. Prosecutors tend to view the collision in bad weather as evidence of the fact that you weren't driving "with due care and attention" (to the weather/road conditions.
What you told the officer about what you thought about the warning signs and/or your speed is probably not going to be relevant since it is unlikely the crown will seek to have those statements introduced at trial to support the charge.
If you admit to having bad tires that will tend to support a finding of careless driving because, again, the prosecutor will likely say that you should have been driving more carefully if you knew there was a problem with your tires.
The ironic thing is I was going under the speed limit while on the highway. I just have no way of proving that. And I only started sliding when I tried to slow down for the onramp. Kind of what I figured, hence why I said nothing about it at the time. The cop actually said he wouldn't recommend it as I shouldn't even need to take it that far. I did look around and only know of one in my area and since I have had prior business dealings with the owner of the company and found him to be an unreliable person. I may have to pay extra to get someone from toronto to drive in. I just spoke to the prosecutor after a week of trying to get ahold of her. The conversation left me with less answers than I had hoped for. The cop made it sound like if I called her she'd offer something on the spot, she said I have to pay it or take it to trial. She said at that point I should get some form to request the prosecutor to review it before hand, so perhaps that's what he was talking about. I think I'm going to email the officer just to get his input again. And you're right, there are no witnesses. Someone must have called it in though, as the cops were there within 2 minutes. For all I know that could've been the person behind me, though I'm not even sure there was someone behind me that could've seen it. Thanks for the input :)
Simon Borys wrote:
The fact that it was raining isn't going to help you. The typical response from prosecutors when people say they crashed because of the weather is that you should have been going slower if the weather was bad. Prosecutors tend to view the collision in bad weather as evidence of the fact that you weren't driving "with due care and attention" (to the weather/road conditions.
The ironic thing is I was going under the speed limit while on the highway. I just have no way of proving that. And I only started sliding when I tried to slow down for the onramp.
Simon Borys wrote:
If you admit to having bad tires that will tend to support a finding of careless driving because, again, the prosecutor will likely say that you should have been driving more carefully if you knew there was a problem with your tires.
Kind of what I figured, hence why I said nothing about it at the time.
Stanton wrote:
General consensus on these forums is that for a careless driving charge, legal representation is recommended. It\u2019s considered a major conviction by insurance providers, and you\u2019re rates could double.
The cop actually said he wouldn't recommend it as I shouldn't even need to take it that far. I did look around and only know of one in my area and since I have had prior business dealings with the owner of the company and found him to be an unreliable person. I may have to pay extra to get someone from toronto to drive in.
Stanton wrote:
The good news is that prosecutors are usually quite willing to offer plea deals with careless driving charges to something much less serious (i.e. leave roadway not in safety). In your case, they may have difficulty even proving the charge since it\u2019s a single motor vehicle accident with no witnesses. It might be best to fight the charge outright rather than even accept a plea deal.
I just spoke to the prosecutor after a week of trying to get ahold of her. The conversation left me with less answers than I had hoped for. The cop made it sound like if I called her she'd offer something on the spot, she said I have to pay it or take it to trial. She said at that point I should get some form to request the prosecutor to review it before hand, so perhaps that's what he was talking about. I think I'm going to email the officer just to get his input again.
And you're right, there are no witnesses. Someone must have called it in though, as the cops were there within 2 minutes. For all I know that could've been the person behind me, though I'm not even sure there was someone behind me that could've seen it.
I got ticket for failing to stop at stop sign in Toronto. i heard that the police officer must see the stop line, if there is one, from where he was sitting. That is exactly my case, Is it a strong case? If so do i need a picture to show that there is a stop line and a picture to show that he could not see the stop line from where he was sitting?
I got a ticket, Disobey stop sign, sec 136.1.a on dec 6th
I made a left in an intersection and was pulled over by a police officer in an unmarked car who had been sitting down the road. A classic fishing hole situation. I was genuinely surprised when he stopped me and told me I went through a stop sign without even slowing down. I know to shut up and be polite and take the ticket. I…
Yesterday morning, I rear-ended someone. I was going the speed limit. The sun was directly in front of me and it blinded my windshield and my eyes. At the same time, the person in front of me stopped/slowed down (also due to the sun). I started to slow down but didn't stop and I hit them since I couldn't see anything. I was not driving too close initially. I…
I was driving in the county at night and hit a limousine stretched out side ways across the road. The limo had its lights on and had side lighting as well. The police officer charged me with careless driving because it was "fully lit up".
It took me to the next day to figure out what had happened - what I remember made no sense. What I had run across was a "false visual reference" illusion.
I was on hwy 37 trying to make my girlfriends ganadmas mass and I live an hour away and I had an hour to get there so I was going fast but not 50 over untill some idiot got on my tail soo close that I was to concentrated on him that I kept going faster untill I got pulled over at 147 on an 80 km hwy.
I alreaddy lost 3 points and this time was just the…
Hello, got stopped today for rolling a stop sign. Ticket says failure to stop, but quotes hta 1361b.
Doesn't 1361b mean failure to yield?
Is this a fatal error? Or could it be amended at trial. How can I prepare a defence if I don't know if I'm defending the failure to stop or the failure to yield?
After he was providing me with a ticket for failure to obey to the stop sign (I am pretty sure I stopped but less than 3 seconds recommended by my driver ed. instructor), I know everybody say that..as an excuse.
Then he stopped me again to return the documents.
Any advice and feed back would be really appreciated.
Can you get evidence for whether someone had an advanced green at an intersection? My dad was making a right turn on a red (after stopping) into a plaza parking lot. He got hit by someone making a left turn from the opposite lane. The driver told the officer called to the collision that he had an advance green. My dad said he came out of nowhere which makes me…
So i was driving on Eglinton Avenue East near Rosemount Ave.
The school bus was on the the curb on the opposite side of the road while i was travelling on the middle lane of the three-laned Eglinton Avenue East (five lanes apart plus a raised median island seperating the traffic)
I could not see the school bus as my view of the bus was being obstructed by the cars in front of me and on my left hand…
Lots of good information on getting disclosure from the Crown here.
Now, I am just wondering if I will be relying upon evidence of my own at trial... do I have to voluntarily send this material to the Crown in a reasonable time before the trial, or only if they request disclosure from me?
This morning I had an exam for university. I was studying the entire night and i wanted to catch like maybe 1-2 hours of sleep before the exam so i went to sleep. I woke up like 5 hrs after and realize that I was about to miss my exam. I still could have made it so I asked my dad for his car since I was in a huge rush and he gave it to me.
I went on the highway and I was going at 135 km/h but…
the police officer was in in the opesite oncumming lane he was fallowing another car so close that i was not even able to see his cruser till he was buy he said that i was going 111 in a 80 he said he hade me on radar he only asked for me drivers licencs and never asked for my insurence so on the ticket there no insurence dose enyone think i can beat this i wana take it to cort becuse he was…
Hi I have a couple questions so I'll explain my situation and any advice would be appreciated.
Can't remember exact date so lets call it some time in 2008 I got a fine for $5000.00 for driving without in insurance. I never paid the fine and in 2012 I was pulled over and the officer asked to see my license. Although I had it on me I figured it would be under suspension for the unpaid fine from…
Alright, so I did something really stupid the other day, I was driving down a country road and wanted to hit the curves so I passed 3 cars at once, inadvertently making it up to very much past 50 over (80 limit)... Much to my chagrin there was a cop coming in the opposite direction who immediately skidded on the gravel shoulder and who I thought was 100% going to turn around and pull me over,…
Anyone know how backed this courthouse is? I submitted my ticket for trial at the end of August, and still no letter. Im scared it got lost in the mail, can i call the courthouse and find out my courtdate? Or would i have to go in personally?
I recently received a ticket for failure to use low beams - while following - Ticket was issued Sec 168 (
- it was on the 401 and no one was within 500 meters of me, I was warning a oncoming vehicle that there was an officer hiding (which is not illegal or I could not find a law against it) it was a police vehicle travelling at very high rate of speed in the opposite direction with no lights on…
I received a warning letter from MTO for a 2pts ticket.What happened is that the police officer issued a "unsafe left turn" and then changed the ticket to "failed to signal" at the scene, but she submitted both tickets!!! And I !!!ONLY!!! received the latter ticket from her(I requested trial for "failed to signal"). I recently received notice from MTO that I'm convicted for "unsafe left turn".
Hello everyone! I was given a ticket for using a hand-held communication device while driving. It was 3 am, I was at a stop light and the cop saw me with the my phone in my hand. I told him i was just checking the time on it. I received the notes a few weeks ago ill copy them down below. Any help is appreciated although i believe there's no hope for me. The cop recorded me saying what phone i…
I got pulled over about 15 or so days ago the court till this date has not received the summons what is the legal time period that the court has to follow to accept the summons from the office court says its 15 days is the legal timeframe the officer has to serve it on the court
I requested for disclosure of information two months ago.
I received the radar manual after one month, but not others (including maintenance/calibration record of the radar, certificate of police training). On further pursuit, the prosecutor told me that he did not have them and he did not see why I needed these documents. He said he did not know where to get them when I asked.
Last Friday I was pulled over by an OPP motorcycle cop who informed me I was going 134. I was on the SB 404, I did see him parked under a bridge and when I passed him he was not on his bike.
I'm hoping to get some insight for a defense in this case.
I was in lane 1 and I had a car in front of me, and a car behind me, also there was a car speeding down Lane 3 passing everyone and moved quickly into…