So unfortunately I have had a few tickets in the last 5 or 6 years. Thankfully Ticketcombat saved me from one or two. Here is what I don't get though. On your first appearance, the Crown will usually offer most people a deal, ok great. Its usually a reduced fine, and often times a lesser charge with less points, ok great for people that just want an easy out and don't mind the massive insurance hike for 3 years (or if they are lucky, they are allowed 1 ticket). 95% of the people take the deal from my experience, and it saves the courts time and they collect some cash. So a couple of times I offered to pay a ticket with a HIGHER fine, this is more money towards court costs, and whatever else this money goes to, that should be a WIN for the Crown I would have thought. Case and point, speeding ticket with 182 fine, I get offered a 80 dollar fine. I tell him its the same penalty for insurance, and offer to take a red light camera ticket instead which is 300+ dollars. They say no. I shake my head in disbelief and go home and prepare for trial. I have offered to take other things too, parking tickets, really anything that does not have the insurance hike and still has a large fine and they never go for it. What is the deal here, does anyone know? Has anyone had any success making this kind of deal? If so what was the deal? TIA
So unfortunately I have had a few tickets in the last 5 or 6 years. Thankfully Ticketcombat saved me from one or two.
Here is what I don't get though. On your first appearance, the Crown will usually offer most people a deal, ok great. Its usually a reduced fine, and often times a lesser charge with less points, ok great for people that just want an easy out and don't mind the massive insurance hike for 3 years (or if they are lucky, they are allowed 1 ticket). 95% of the people take the deal from my experience, and it saves the courts time and they collect some cash.
So a couple of times I offered to pay a ticket with a HIGHER fine, this is more money towards court costs, and whatever else this money goes to, that should be a WIN for the Crown I would have thought. Case and point, speeding ticket with 182 fine, I get offered a 80 dollar fine. I tell him its the same penalty for insurance, and offer to take a red light camera ticket instead which is 300+ dollars. They say no. I shake my head in disbelief and go home and prepare for trial. I have offered to take other things too, parking tickets, really anything that does not have the insurance hike and still has a large fine and they never go for it.
What is the deal here, does anyone know? Has anyone had any success making this kind of deal? If so what was the deal?
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
Well I don't think that is "it", in the last courthouse I was in I sat near the front on purpose to see what was being offered, and it did not matter what the person did, they were ALL being offered "Disobey Sign", and the people had a wide variety of charges where some were not related or did not fit the mold as you put it, running a red light would be just as suitable in other words or even more suitable.
Well I don't think that is "it", in the last courthouse I was in I sat near the front on purpose to see what was being offered, and it did not matter what the person did, they were ALL being offered "Disobey Sign", and the people had a wide variety of charges where some were not related or did not fit the mold as you put it, running a red light would be just as suitable in other words or even more suitable.
Ynotp is correct. I cant speak to your personal observations, but the plea deal should somehow relate to the actual offence. Keep in mind that the Justice of the Peace could ask for a synopsis of what happened leading up to the charge, so if the offence doesnt fit what happened, a conviction cant be registered. In your case I dont know what offences the Crown was pleading down to "disobey sign", but it is a pretty big catch all for pleas.
Ynotp is correct. I cant speak to your personal observations, but the plea deal should somehow relate to the actual offence. Keep in mind that the Justice of the Peace could ask for a synopsis of what happened leading up to the charge, so if the offence doesnt fit what happened, a conviction cant be registered. In your case I dont know what offences the Crown was pleading down to "disobey sign", but it is a pretty big catch all for pleas.
In my own experience, I was charged with careless for being hit from behind into the car in front of me. Prosecutor offered failure to turn left to avoid collision. Fine. I accepted it. When brought in front of JP, he asked for clarification of events from prosecutor. he then questioned them on how I could have turned left from a stopped position. Charge thrown out.
In my own experience, I was charged with careless for being hit from behind into the car in front of me. Prosecutor offered failure to turn left to avoid collision. Fine. I accepted it. When brought in front of JP, he asked for clarification of events from prosecutor. he then questioned them on how I could have turned left from a stopped position. Charge thrown out.
I was in court last year to dispute a illegal right turn ticket. I was very surprised and lucky to have the fine reduced and plead guilty to " Interfering traffic", which I learned was actually not a HTA offense. Explained to me as a glorified parking ticket.
ynotp wrote:
It isn't ethical to allow someone to plead guilty to something you know they didn't do. A lesser charge is based on the same series of events. For example fail to stop goes down to improper stop.
I was in court last year to dispute a illegal right turn ticket. I was very surprised and lucky to have the fine reduced and plead guilty to " Interfering traffic", which I learned was actually not a HTA offense. Explained to me as a glorified parking ticket.
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK248 http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/ S.170 (12) - Interfere with traffic - Total Payable: $65
hawaii wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Interfering with traffic is an HTA offence....section 170
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording.
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK248 http://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/how-do- ... hedule-43/ S.170 (12) - Interfere with traffic - Total Payable: $65 I guess two versions of that charge?
iFly55 wrote:
hawaii wrote:
hwybear wrote:
Interfering with traffic is an HTA offence....section 170
My mistake,? could it be obstructing traffic, sorry it was last year, cant recall exact wording.
pulled over leaving a survey in guelph. After arguing with the officer for about 10 minutes, he mentioned something being wrong with my truck. Told me to put on my emergency brake, and i did. Told me to put it in gear, and i did, truck did not move. Told me to hit the gas, and i did and the truck…
Got two very heavy tickets -- for failing to stop for a school bus, and for using a handheld device. Was running late in a morning rush traffic in Toronto and apparently passed a school bus on the opposite side w/o noticing its signal. A few meters after that I stopped behind the other cars waiting…
I recently received a ticket for proceeding contrary to sign at an intersection. While there are other issues with the offence (sign is not visible until 10ft from intersection, officer wrote wrong license plate number on ticket) my biggest question is about the sign itself.
I posted here a *while* back when I first got my speeding ticket, and I've been fighting it forever. Anyway, long story short - I went and had an appeal and both the prosecutor and the Judge agree that I have valid grounds to appeal on, but what we're arguing is whether the correct remedy is a…
My wife had an auto accident back in May. It is gradually being dealt with by our insurance company ( by the broker actually). My question is about the legal power of the insurance code OAP1. Evidently this set of rules is the Ten Commandments for the insurance companies and the adjustors seem to…
What is the requirement for stopping when a school bus is traveling down the roadway, initiates the flashing red lights while still moving but has not yet stopped? If a motorist is traveling through an intersection (through the free-flow approach, minor-street stop controlled) and an oncoming…
In 2005, the government passed legislation that enabled the introduction of variable speed limits at some point in the future. It didn't take effect right away, so it sat waiting for "proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor." Just by chance... I was reading the HTA earlier while browsing this…
I was on my way to work on a divided four lane highway. I was in the right hand lane following the flow of traffic. There was a slower car ahead of me and I wanted to change lanes and maintain my speed. When I looked in my left side mirror, I notice a red car going pretty fast in the passing…
So i got charged with Hand Held Device, just want to ask everyone if i could use this as my defence
It was midnight, I was dropping my fiance to pick up something on north bound Yonge st (near church) with my emergency lights on, Officer came and asked me to move along so i went up a few streets and…
