Fatal Error on Summons?

ghj
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined:

Fatal Error on Summons?

Unread post by ghj on

Hi guys,

Wondering if the officer not signing the "Summons to Defendant" Form 104 defendants copy would constitute a fatal error. To be clear, the certificate is signed with a carbon transfer signature, however not one that is in ink. I have noticed that a fair amount of officers take the time to sign each individual carbon copy, however in this case they did not.

Thanks!


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Moderator

Unread post by hwybear on

It is still a signature regardless.
- carbon signature - completely identical to top/original therefore defendant received a complete "true copy" of face of offence notice and/or summons, unlike a ink signature which would not be completely identical thru all copies
- ink signature - can say that particular piece of paper was personally signed by the officer, which cant do with carbon

IMO it is just a "po-ta-toe" to "po-tat-toe" thing....means same thing there is a signature on the document served to the defendant
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
LAWguy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined:

Unread post by LAWguy on

Hey Guys,

Interesting enough, this being my first post and all I have a similar situation. I received 2 "Summons To Defendant" and both have the following errors, please post opinions I’m wondering if these are fatal errors:

-Misspelled Name (on both)
-Incorrect postal code (each summons has a different postal)
-Both Summonses have no signatures

I’m guessing the signatures or lack-there-of constitute Fatal Errors?
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

Unless an error prejudices your ability to make full answer and defence to the charge, it is not likely to be considered fatal.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


User avatar
LAWguy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined:

Unread post by LAWguy on

Simon Borys wrote:Unless an error prejudices your ability to make full answer and defence to the charge, it is not likely to be considered fatal.
So I guess all these "Fatal Error" rules are irrelevent then? just wondering because if your statement is true, those rules mean nothing.
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

I don't know what "fatal error rules" you're referring to, but, as I said, anything that prejudices your ability to make full answer and defence is usually considered a fatal error, which makes sense if you think about it. In my experience, fatal errors would be things like no date, wrong or missing act or section number, no defendant listed, no signature of officer, etc.

Without these there is insufficient information on the ticket to create a defence to the charge, which prejudices your ability, which is why they're fatal.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


User avatar
LAWguy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined:

Unread post by LAWguy on

Simon Borys wrote: In my experience, fatal errors would be things like no date, wrong or missing act or section number, no defendant listed, no signature of officer, etc..
Well thats what I'm trying to fiqure out. If "no signature" is a fatal error does that constitue the ticket being quashed? Here's what Ticket Combat has to say on it:
Ticket Combat wrote: Fatal Errors
A fatal error is an error on your ticket that is sufficient to get your case thrown out. It is quite common for people to receive a ticket with errors on it. Unfortunately not all errors are fatal. If the right person is standing in court and the police officer can identify you, then the error could not have been fatal. In fact, under Section 34 of the Provincial Offences Act the justice can amend the ticket to fix the error so that it is correct.

Non-Fatal Errors

The following errors are not fatal and won't get your ticket thrown out:

•misspelled name, incorrect address, wrong driver's licence number;
•incorrect location;
•incorrect date or time;
•wrong licence plate;
•wrong vehicle color or description;
•incorrect set fine or total payable amount.

FATAL Errors

The following errors are fatal and will get your ticket thrown out:

•no offence date;
•no defendant’s name (if your name is misspelled, the ticket still counts);
•no location;
•missing officer’s signature;
•unknown offence (e.g. speeding 70kh/hr in a 64km/hr zone);
•the filing date is beyond seven days.
Apperently according to ticket combat, the "fatal errors" are enough to get the ticket quashed.
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"


fredfred
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 37
Joined:

Unread post by fredfred on

Simon Borys wrote:I don't know what "fatal error rules" you're referring to, but, as I said, anything that prejudices your ability to make full answer and defence is usually considered a fatal error, which makes sense if you think about it. In my experience, fatal errors would be things like no date, wrong or missing act or section number, no defendant listed, no signature of officer, etc.

Without these there is insufficient information on the ticket to create a defence to the charge, which prejudices your ability, which is why they're fatal.
Simon

Just curious... I've seen other discussions on this board that have said that an incorrectly calculated fine on a speeding ticket is considered a fatal error. Is this the case and if so, how does this "prejudice your ability to make full answer and defence"? Is it that it creates confusion over what speed you are actually being charged with?


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

LAWguy wrote:
Simon Borys wrote: In my experience, fatal errors would be things like no date, wrong or missing act or section number, no defendant listed, no signature of officer, etc..
Well thats what I'm trying to fiqure out. If "no signature" is a fatal error does that constitue the ticket being quashed? Here's what Ticket Combat has to say on it:
The fatal errors you've listed above are for regular tickets. To the best of my knowledge they are NOT the same for summons. A summons isn't a charging document, it just compels you to attend Court. An information will be generated for the Courts which is the actual charging document for the offences listed on the summons.


User avatar
LAWguy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined:

Unread post by LAWguy on

Stanton wrote: The fatal errors you've listed above are for regular tickets. To the best of my knowledge they are NOT the same for summons. A summons isn't a charging document, it just compels you to attend Court. An information will be generated for the Courts which is the actual charging document for the offences listed on the summons.
Stanton- This is what I'm trying to fiqure out. What do you mean by "An information will be generated for the courts"??
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"


Stanton
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 2111
Joined:
Location: Ontario

Unread post by Stanton on

On your first Court date an information (a document listing the charges) will be read out, and entered on record. The officer who charged you is responsible for generating the document and forwarding it to the Courts. It's basically just a formal document that list the name of the accused, the charge wordings and section.


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

I agree with Stanton with respect to the Summons. It is the information itself that you'd be looking for errors on in that case. In the case of Part I offence notices, that document IS the information, so that's why you are concerned with errors on it.

I think it might clear things up to state that a fatal error will always result in the ticket being quashed (that's why it's called fatal). The problem is, there is not 100% consensus on what constitutes a fatal error, though generally I agree with the list you provided from Ticket Combat.

With respect to incorrect or missing set fines, those are fatal, according to the Ontario Court of Appeal, incorrect set fines are fatal errors and will result in the ticket being quashed. They don't refer to missing set fines, but those are fatal as well.
http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Moderator

Unread post by Radar Identified on

I'd agree with Stanton and Simon Borys.

"Fatal error" does not apply to a Summons. This is because there is no "out of court" resolution when you are summoned to appear in court. Part I offences (regular tickets) DO have a mechanism for "out of court" resolutions. In fact, the Provincial Offences Act specifically says that, if the defendant fails to respond or does not appear for trial, the presiding Justice of the Peace must examine the ticket to see if it is "complete and regular." If it is not, the JP has to quash it... BUT this ONLY applies to Part I. Summons are under Part III, and the provision for quashing if there is an error does not exist. So, you really did not have a choice but to go to court.
* The above is NOT legal advice. By acting on anything I have said, you assume responsibility for any outcome and consequences. *
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
LAWguy
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined:

Unread post by LAWguy on

Radar Identified wrote:I'd agree with Stanton and Simon Borys.

"Fatal error" does not apply to a Summons. This is because there is no "out of court" resolution when you are summoned to appear in court. Part I offences (regular tickets) DO have a mechanism for "out of court" resolutions. In fact, the Provincial Offences Act specifically says that, if the defendant fails to respond or does not appear for trial, the presiding Justice of the Peace must examine the ticket to see if it is "complete and regular." If it is not, the JP has to quash it... BUT this ONLY applies to Part I. Summons are under Part III, and the provision for quashing if there is an error does not exist. So, you really did not have a choice but to go to court.
Hey Radar Identified,

Thank for that explanation. I wasn't really disagreeing with anyone, I'm was trying to get to the bottom of how these diffrences play out. I agree with both Stanton and Simon as well, I just didnt know if this applied to Summons and it makes total sense now.

Would you happen to know the section in the POA that states the facts you mentioned. I always looking to read and aquire more knowledge. I would like to see how the POA defines "Complete and Regular" as well.

Thanks to everyone who replied :wink:
"It's only a matter of time before you get pulled over for something"


User avatar
Simon Borys
VIP
VIP
Posts: 1065
Joined:
Contact:

Unread post by Simon Borys on

s. 9.1




http://www.boryslaw.ca
NOTHING I SAY ON HERE IS LEGAL ADVICE.


Post Reply

Return to “Courts and Procedure”